



i ^ V< \ 












*fr r\ 



x°°^ 









THE 



EVIDENCES 



AG A IHST 



CHRISTIANITY. 



By JOHX Ss HITTELL. 



-*» » » * .fr - 



,$rf& 



PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR. 



San /raitnsra. 



1856. 



IV. INDEX. 

XXXIV. — Creation and Antediluvian Historj. 

XXXV.— Chronology of the Bible. 

XXXVI. — Stubbornness of the Jews. 

XXXVII. — Miraculous power of Witches and Sorcerers. 

XXXVIII. — The existence of races of Giants. 

XXXIX. — Possession of the human body by Devils. 

XL. — The Massacre of the Innocents. 

XLI. — Contradictory Statements. 

XLII. — Existence of a Personal Creator of the Universe. 

XLIII. — Nature of the Deity. 

XLI V.— The Immortality of the Soul. 

XLV. — The Moral Accountability of Man to the Deity. 

XL VI. — Immediate Divine Government. 

XL VII.— The Scheme of Redemption. 

XLVIII. — Contradictory Doctrines. 

XLIX.— Immortality of the Soul. 

L. — Myth of Adam's Sin. 

LI. The Oneness of God. 

LII. — .Means of attaining Divine Favor. 

LIII.— The Devil. 

LIV. — Divine Favoritism. 

LA 7 ". — General Spirit of the Law. 

LVI. — Permanence of the Jewish Law. 

LVII. — Jesus a Criminal under the Jewish Law. 

LVIII. — Review of Inconsistencies. 

LIX.— Practical Effects. 
LX. — Errors of the Inspired. 
LXI. — Literary Merit. 
LXII. — Spread of Christianity. 
LXIIL— The Witness of the Spirit. 
LXIV.— Review. 
LXV.— Absolute Truth. 
LXVI. — Conclusion. 



PKEFACE. 



I. Christianity, directly or indirectly, comes home to, and has a strong influ- 
ence upon, every educated thinking man of this age. It is a subject which the 
great majority of thinking men are compelled to study more or less, and which 
for the convenience of students should be set forth as clearly and completely as 
possible, within a reasonable space. The religious doctrine which deserves con- 
sideration at all, should be considered on both sides, and the tenets of the 
Christian can urge no good claim to be exempt from the general rule. The 
" Evidences of [for] Christianity" have been written and published by nearly, if 
not quite, a hundred authors, mauy of them men of recognized literary ability; 
but the Evidences against Christianity had, previous to the composition of this 
work, never been written in a connected shape, and the arguments of skeptics 
were never fairly represented by orthodox writers. So far are the rigidly 
righteous from desiring to give a fair hearing to the other side, that it is well 
understood among the book # writing advocates of Christianity, and has been 
openly expressed by the North British Review, * a high authority among them, 
that it is a great evil of books written in defense of the Bible, one-sided as they 
all are, that "they repeat and give currency to the fallacious arguments which 
they wish to expose!" Every person of education learns that Hobbes, Tindal, 
Toland, Shaftesbury, Bolingbroke, Hume, Gibbon, Paine, Burns, Byron, Shel- 
ley, Tennyson, Lyell, Gliddon, Carlyle, Emerson, Franklin, Jefferson, Madison, 
Bentham, Brougham, Romilly, Bo wring, Greg, Parker, Hennell, Montaigne, 
Bayle, Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, D'Alembert, La Place, Arago, Mirabeau, 
Napoleon, D'Holbach, Volney, Buffon, Beranger, Cousin, Comte, Lessing, Wie- 
land, Goethe, Zschokke, Frederick the Great, Humboldt, Agassiz, Fichte, Schei- 
ling, Hegel, De Wette, and Strauss,t are or were more or less inclined to doubt, 
and to express their doubts, of the truth of Christianity. These are great names, 
and the religious opinions of such men are surely worthy of notice. But it is 
no slight task to learn those opinions, scattered as they are through hundred! 

* May, 1854. t See Appendix, note 1. 



6 preface. [ma. r. 

of volumes, many of which arc with difficult}" to be found, and require a great 
expense of time and money for their examination. Besides, the writings of 
some of these authors are not easily to be understood, even by the thorough- 
bred student, and are quite unintelligible to the masses, who depend for their 
support upon their physical labor. From the skeptical writiugs of these and 
kindred men, I have tried to compile a book for the million, — to give within a 
small space, a clear view of the principal evidences against Christianity. A few 
of the ideas advanced will perhaps be recognized as original, but it is not neces- 
sary that they should be specially designated here. The work is now published 
and herewith offered to the public. A large class of my countrymen — a very 
respectable class — a class to whose opinions I am in no wise insensible, will 
consider the composition and publication of this work as conclusive proof that 
the writer is a very unwise, even a bad man, and an enemy to God, to religion,, 
and to society : but I cannot in these matters follow the dictation of others. 
He who wishes to do credit to humanity, must seek for his rule of action within 
and not without. The book is published in the belief that it will do good, and 
in the strongest confidence that it can do no evil. It is written carefully and 
conscientiously, and does not, to the author's knowledge, contain one untrue 
statement or unfair argument, or objection to Christianity, which can be satis- 
factorily controverted. It is true that little is said on the affirmative side of the 
question, but it was useless in such a work to repeat the substance of those 
able, clear and complete essays, on the Evidences of Christianity, which are to 
be had of every bookseller. I seek to rob no man of his faith ; if anybody desire 
to shut his eyes to the light, I shall not tear them open by force. But, on the 
other hand, if any one should wish to learn what n%ay be said against Christi- 
anity, I will endeavor to teach within a few hours-, what he could not elsewhere 
learn without months of study. If the attempt to save labor in the acquisition 
of such knowledge, — if the diffusion of such knowledge be wrong, let the sin be 
on my own head. 

Before undertaking the labor, I satisfied myself that if the Bible be the word 
of God, no attack which I could make upon it by an appeal to reason, would do 
the least injury or discredit to it. But rather I may hope, that if my book should 
find readers, it may aid to dispel various crude, superstitious and debasing no- 
tions prevalent among Christians and taught by the Church. Such are the 
belief in the miracles of the ancient and modern priests, in ghosts, in the 
possession ot the hu .an body by devils, in an anthropomorphic God, in special 
providences, in the duty of the people to submit unresistingly to their rulers, in 
the virtue of persecuting heretics, in the sinfulness of unbelief and many olher 
kindred tenets. The skeptical writings of the last century had a great influence 
to purify the Christian faith on these and similar points of doctrine, and I know 



SEC. I.] PREFACE. 7 

no reason why good should not be done in the same way now. Bat my expec- 
tations and incentives were not to purify Christianity, but to aid in breaking it 
down entirely. I hare satisfied myself by an examination, neither hasty nor 
superficial, of the whole subject, that the letter of Christianity and its spirit — 
in so far as that differs from natural religion and morality — are false and pro- 
ductive of evil ; that they form the first and greatest barrier now obstruc- 
ting the social, political, and moral progress of the human race ; that they 
cannot exist much longer in general acceptation among civilized nations ; and 
that the sooner they be stricken down, the better it will be for all. I do not 
offend the moral sense of a large portion of my fellow citizens and friends with- 
out a feeling of sadness, but believing as I do in regard to the influence of the 
Bible — believing with all the sincerity of which I am capable — I would be 
untrue to my conceptions of the dignity of human nature, if I should be deterred 
from giving expression to these opinions by the disapproval of others. Full of 
faith in the intelligence and morality of the mass of the American people, and 
satisfied that for them, at least, light on both sides of such a question as Chris- 
tianity, cannot be evil; and fearing (except for the ill-performance of my task) 
no literal or figurative cross or stake, * which have been threatened from time 
immemorial against all religious teachers, who should proclaim the esoteric 
doctrines long taught to the initiated only, I shall not stop short at the exoteric, 
but will freely speak the whole truth, as I understand it, and as it may be appli- 
cable in this place. " I persuadef myself that the life and faculties of man, at 
the best but short and limited, cannot be enipk^ed more rationally or laudably 
than in the search of knowledge, and especially of that sort which relates to our 
duty and to our happiness. In these inquiries, therefore, wherever I perceive any 
glimmering of truth before me, I readily pursue and endeavor to trace it to its 
source, without any reserve or caution of pushing the discovery too far, or 
opening too great a glare of it to the public. I look upon the discovery of any- 
thing which is true as a valuable acquisition to society, which cannot possibly 
hurt or obstruct the good effect of any other truth whatsoever." 

This book, as now presented to the public, has been prepared for publication 
in California, and is quite different from what it might have been, if prepared 
to be issued in New York; where the expenses of publication are much less, 
and where the persons, disposed to read a book upon a religious subject, are 
more numerous. Many portions of the argument will no doubt be found very 
unsatisfactory on account of brevity, but it was not possible to make the book 
larger, with any hope of escaping pecuniary loss in the publication. 

* See Appendix, note 2. t The Rev. Dr. Middleton's Free Inquiry. Preface. 



INTRODUCTION. 



II. It is probable that every one, into whose hands this book will fall, knows 
and will recall to mind the denunciations pronounced by the Christian Church 
against all persons who doubt the truth of the Bible, against all who express 
such doubts, and against all who read books intended to question or overthrow 
the Christian faith. * The reader may say, " I have been taught to believe that 
all persons who do not accept the Bible will be punished with infinite pains in 
everlasting Hell ; this book is written to lead me to reject the Bible : is it right 
for me to read such a work ? And if 1 do read it, shall I give a fair hearing to 
what the author has to say — shall I begin by considering the question at issue 
(the truth and immediate divine origin of the Bible,) to be open and undecided — 
shall I doubt, and question, and investigate both sides and every unclear point, 
and demand conclusive evidence previous to settling into firm belief, as I would 
in questions of science or of political philosophy ?" The Church replies, " Do 
not read the book ; listen to nothing that may imperil your eternal salvation ; 
and if you do read, keep before your mind the fact that the Bible is the word of 
God, and is necessarily of higher authority than youi reason ; remember that 
the Bible contains the teachings of divine and infinite wisdom ; remember that 
your mind is finite and fallible, and cannot comprehend the infinite; and 
remember that the truths beyond reason appear contrary to it. Let these facts 
be fully impressed upon your mind, and listen to the words of the Holy 
Scripture as a little child would listen — with implicit faith and obedience — to 
the words of a wise and good parent." The reader asks, " How do you know 
that the Bible is the word of God ?" 

Yes, that is the question : How do we know that the Bible is the word of God ? 
In reply to the demands of the Church I shall make four points : 

1. The prohibition of free inquiry bears fraud upon its face. 

2. The only proper test for truth in religion is reason. 

- ■ ■ — ^ 

* See Appendix, note 3. 



SEC. II.] FREE INQUIRY NECESSARY. 9 

3. It is the right and duty of every man to examine both sides of religion 
before believing. 

4. Belief in untruth after free inquiry is better than the adherence to truth 
without free inquiry. 

The prohibition of free inquiry bears fraud upon its face. It is just such a 
trick as might reasonably be resorted to, to protect a false religion. What a 
glorious plan — to bring up a whole nation in an undoubting faith in, and 
a boundless fear of, a confederated set of priests, whom it supports in luxury 
and power, and whose authority dare never be questioned ! The prohibition of 
free inquiry has been used to protect many fraudulent creeds. Every nation 
of men has its priests, who live by their creed, live well by it, are supported in 
luxury and high consideration by it, and who consequently are highly interested 
in its support. Their profession gives them a peculiar influence over the people, 
and in many States they have been almost omnipotent, politically. Their words 
were received with superstitious awe, and they could entertain a hope of success 
that a prohibition of free inquiry would be successful. There were such bodies 
of professional priests in ancient Egypt, in Babylon, in Persia, in Gaul, in 
Phoenicia, in Judea, in Etruria, and in Greece. There are such priests now in 
Japan, in Hindostan, in Thibet, in Arabia, in Russia, in France, in England, 
and in Utah, and also among many other civilized and barbarous nations. The 
priests in no two of the lands specially mentioned above, taught or teach the 
same creed. There have been at least two hundred different religious creeds 
taught and extensively received among men, different from, and inconsistent 
with, each other, and all necessarily false, except one. These creeds were not 
only false, but their priests knew them to be false. Cicero said he did not know 
how two Roman augurs (priests) could meet without laughing at each other. 
Many of the Buddhist priests in China have confessed to Protestant missionaries 
that their creed was false, but they could not say so publicly, for if they did 
they would lose their means of support. The Catholic priests in Spain laughed 
at Blanco White, when he confessed to them with great seriousness that he 
doubted the inspiration of the Bible. Tliey had got beyond that long before. 
A large number of the Catholic clergy in France publicly declared during the 
great Revolution that their creed was a fraud. It is no secret that there is 
much skepticism among the Protestant clergy of the United States. And yet 
all these separate sets of priests make the same claim, that their creed is the 
word of God, and is exempt from examination by reason. They not only 
declare doubt to be a heinous sin, but wherever they have sufficient iniiuence 
they make it a crime, punishable severely by the civil law. Moses said the 
man who would not follow the Levites should die : in Egypt, death was the 
penalty for rebellion against the priests, or for the killing — even if accidental — 



10 INTRODUCTION. fsEO II- 

of one of the sacred animals, such as a cat or an ibis : in Greece, Socrates had to 
die because he was suspected of encouraging doubt of the prevalent creed ; and 
Anaxagoras — the teacher and friend of Pericles — had to fly from Athens because 
he said that rain was caused not by the immediate will of God — the orthodox 
doctrine — but by the condensation of vapor in the air according to general 
laws. The same prohibition of doubt and free inquiry prevails now among the 
Bramins, the Buddhists, and the Mohammedans ; and that prohibition which 
is thus made to serve as a protection for the four principal creeds on the 
earth, each accepted by more than a hundred millions of men, and each incon- 
sistent with all the others — that prohibition bears fraud upon its face. Truth 
wears no defensive armor, shuns no enemy, and fears no fight : her only and 
constant prayer is for light and for a chance at the foe. 

The only proper test for truth in religion is reason. Reason is the word of 
God, given to man for his guidance. Without it he has no guide, and the 
revelation which does not appeal to his reason and agree to its demands is no 
revelation. That reason is the only proper test for truth in matters of science, 
or political, moral and social philosophy, has never been denied; and there is 
no good reason why a distinction should be made in this regard between those 
branches and religious philosophy. If the Bible was first adopted without 
reason, then it should be examined by reason now, to prevent the continuance 
of error; if it was investigated by reason in the beginning, then we should 
have the same privilege which our forefathers had. There is no probability 
that truth will lose ground by free discussion ; and he who expresses fears that 
it will, betrays at once his belief that his cause is bad. 

It is not only the right out it is the duty of every man to examine the evidences 
on both sides of a question before adopting a firm belief on either side. On any 
other principle there will never be any progress in arriving at truth. Doubt is 
the beginning of philosophy — its mother and constant companion. He who 
believes what is told him on the mere say-so of others is always reckoned a fool. 
It may be very well for a child, entirely lacking in judgment, to receive as true 
everything told to it, but something different is expected from men of mature 
years. They should not only accept no doctrines without investigation, and 
reject all proved to be untrue, but they should also reject all not proved to be 
true. But in matters of religion it is peculiarly the duty of every man of intel- 
ligence to investigate, and demand conclusive evidence before believing. The 
subject is every day before him ; it is frequently under public discussion ; 
information upon it may be obtained with comparative ease ; and the matter 
may be said to be within the comprehension of every one — at least, every one 
must form some opinion upon it. The decision is one of high importance; for 
upon it may depend much of a man's mode of thought, theory of duty, and 



SEC. II.] BEWARE OF PRIESTLY FRAUD. 11 

course of life. We know that religious opinions at this day render a laTge 
majority of the human race subject to debasing superstitious, to illiberal preju- 
dices, and to mental darkness generally. It is net only so to-day, but it always 
has been so. It was so in ancient Egypt, Babylon, and Gaul ; it is so in modern 
Hindostan, in Ceylon, in Spain, in Turkey, and in many other countries which 
it i3 not necessary to name. A large proportion of the wars, the despotic 
governments, the illiberal laws, the inqubitory persecutions of good and wise 
men, and the opposition to beneficent reforms is chargeable to the self-styled 
ministers of God. We not only know that the creeds have been false, and that 
they have been productive of almost unparalleled evils, but we know that they 
were conceived in fraud ? and are still maintained by the grossest deception over 
a large portion of the earths surface. We not only know the fraud, but we 
comprehend the entire baseness of the motives at the bottom of it This know- 
ledge should be a warning to every man to avoid the pit into which so many 
others have fallen. Every manly feeling, every sentiment of honor, the devo- 
tion to truth, the love of fair play, the hatred of superstition and tyranny, 
indignation at ecclesiastical deceptions, opposition to intolerance, love of peace 
and good-will to man — all combine to determine every man to use every 
reasonable exertion to avoid being duped into slavery to a false creed, with all 
its concurrent errors — all combine to induce him to distrust tradition as a guide 
to religious truth — all combine to induce him to place the fullest confidence in 
his reason as the only reliable guide in the search for truth — all combine to 
induee him to examine both sides before believing either. It does not follow 
because most creeds are false that all are ; it does not follow because the great 
majority of priests are deliberate deceivers, that all are. Let not the Christian 
faith and the Christian priests be condemned beforehand; give them a fair 
hearing. The sins of priests in general have been here particularly referred to, 
not to prejudice the mind of the reader against the Christian -clergy, but to 
awaken him to the importance of making a particular investigation. 

Belief in untruth after free inquiry is letter than adlierenee to truth without 
free inquiry. Human reason is fallible,. and liable to error. No man can have 
any satisfactory assurance of possessing the perfect truth: many men have felt 
confident of such possession, but have been in error, as we know of a certainty; 
and knowing the mistakes of other men in this matter we should be careful not 
to imitate them. That which we accept as truth, but which will in all proba- 
bility fee proved within fifty years to be untrue, cannot be of any great value 
in itself. But even if we could attain to pure truth, and make ourselves certain 
of the attainment, it would be of no value if it were not appreciated as valuable 
and sacred. An idiot may believe sincerely that Jesus was the son of God, but 
surely that mere belief is no merit A child may believe that the earth moves 



12 THE BIBLE THE WORD OF GOD. [SEC. III. 

round the sun, but the mere repetition of such an opinion brings little blessing 
to his mind. It is the how and why which does the good. The highest end 
of all philosophy is not the possession of truth, but rather the purifying and 
elevating influences of the devotion to truth, and the mental light, — the correct 
habits of thought attained in its search. He who is trying to get hold of reli- 
gious truth merely for the purpose of buying sugar candy with it, in this 
world or another, does not deserve the name of a philosopher, and does no 
honor to that of a man. 



THE BIBLE THE WOED OF GOD. 



III. The fundamental dogma of Christianity, as the latter presents itself in 
this age, is that the Bible is the word of God — a divinely inspired revelation of 
the nature of man's moral and religious duties, and of the realities of the spi- 
ritual world. With that dogma the Christian religion must stand or fall. The 
Bible asserts that all men are descended from one human father, that he trans- 
gressed the divine command, and thereby caused all his posterity to be born in 
sin, subject to the divine wrath ; that the Almighty chose Abraham and his 
offspring to be a favorite nation : and that God is one, but composed of three 
persons, of whom one, Jesus Christ, came down to earth, lived thirty years on 
earth in the human form and was crucified, thus atoning for the sin of Adam. 
I propose to consider the truth of Christianity, by examining whether its 
foundation (the Bible) be true. In the course of this examination it will be 
necessary to consider the contents of the book, and the principal points of doc- 
trine therein taught. These points must stand or fall with the alleged book — 
revelation. 

In examining whether the Bible be the word of God, it is proper that we 
should consider some preliminary questions, such as whether there is an ante- 
cedent probability that a book-revelation would be given to man, — what that 
book-revelation, if given, might be expected to contain, and whether there are 
any peculiar difficulties in the examination of the subject ? Such questions are 



SEC. III.] ANTECEDENT PROBABILITIES. 13 

perfectly proper. " We * must suppose that if the Creator would communi- 
cate truth to his creatures, he gave them minds originally capable of sympa- 
thizing with it. In a word, the first revelation of God to man must have been 
an inward revelation." " When this revelationf [of philosophic reason] is clear 
and certain, by intuition or necessary induction, no subsequent revelation sup- 
ported by prophecies or miracles can supersede it." If a book-revelation should 
appeal to reason, and correspond to it, then we may properly ask the prelimi- 
nary questions above referred to. 

Paley contends that there " is an antecedent probability that God would grant 
& direct revelation to teach man hi3 duties and the moral nature of the universe, 
which are not clear by the light of natural religion; and that it is consistent 
with the nature of a good deity that he should give some sanction to truth and 
justice among men, further than that discoverable to the unassisted human 
reason." There is undoubtedly such a probability to the man who believes 
with Paley in a personal God, who formed man the chief object in creation, and 
who sees the great majority of the human race living in accordance with the 
teachings and impulses of their natural minds, in the deepest ignorance, super- 
stition, brutishness and misery. Perhaps it would be feetter to say, that a man 
with Paley's views of the divine government of the universe, should believe 
that there ougltt to be a revelation, but whether external, in a book, or internal, 
by increasing man's intelligence, might admit oi a doubt. But to the man who 
does not accept the Christian conception of the deity, the probability might be 
just on the other side. 

But admitting the antecedent probability that a book-revelation of the will of 
God has been given to man, is there an antecedent probability that the Bible is 
that book-revelation ? No : there the probabilities are not in favor of the Bible. 
There have been, at least, fifteen or twenty different books inconsistent with 
each other, and each said by its friends to be the word of God, and the only 
word of God. The chances antecedent to the examination are then, at least, 
fourteen to one against any particular book. The Jews have their Mosaic Law, 
the Christians have their New Testament, the Mohammedans have their Koran, 
the Mormons have the "The Book of Mormon," the Hindoos have their Yedas., 
the Parsees have their Zend-Avesta, the ancient Eg}^ptians had their books 
of Thoth, the Romans the Sibylline books, and the Buddhists have their gospels.. 
By no possibility can all these books be divine revelations. 

Are there any peculiar reasons why we should look with distrust upon all 
these books, represented to be divine revelations? Yes, there are— all these 
books, except one, must necessarily be fraudulent; and by these fraudulent 

* Morell — Philosophy of Religion. 

i John Adams'a Letter to Thomas Jefferson, Dec. 25, 1813. 



14 THE BIBLE THE WORD OF GOD. [SEC. III.. 

revelations a very large proportion, if not a very large majority, of the human 
race, for three or four thousand years past — back, indeed, as far as history 
extends, have been deluded. The knowledge of these great delusions should 
make us peculiarly careful, that we may not be deceived in the same manner; 
and we can exercise our care the more willingly since we may be sure that the 
more thorough our examination of a subject, the more likely it is that the exact 
truth will be attained. We not only know that such frauds were committed, 
but we also understand the motives to which they owed their origin. History 
tells us that m ancient times the people were very ignorant and superstitious, 
and easily imposed upon : the priests were numerous, and so influential that 
they could induce the people to believe or do almost anything. It was the 
common belief among the political rulers that government could not be firmly 
established, or morality preserved without the aid of superstition, the terror of 
the gods, and an implicit faith that the laws were of divine origin. Strabo 
expresses a common opinion among Greek and Koman magistrates when he says : 
" It is impossible to conduct women and the gross multitude, and to render 
them holy, pious, and upright by the precepts of reason and philosophy : super- 
stition, or the fear of the gods must be called in aid, the influence of which is 
founded on fictions and prodigies. For the thunder of Jupiter, the Eegis of Mi- 
nerva, the trident of Neptune, the torches and snakes of the furies, the ivy- 
adorned spears of the gods, and the whole ancient mythology, are all fables, 
which the lawgivers who formed the political constitutions of States, emploved 
as bugbears to overawe the credulous and simple." Robertson, after quoting 
the above in his history of India, adds — "These ideas of the philosophers of 
Europe were precisely the same which the Bramins had adopted in India, 
and according to which they regulated their conduct with respect to the great 
body of the people. As their order had an exclusive right to read the sacred 
books, to cultivate and teach science, they could more effectually prevent all 
who were not members of it, from acquiring any portion of information beyond 
what they were pleased to impart." Neither did such views expire with ancient 
times. They are still common even in the most enlightened countries, and 
men are to be met on all sides, who assert positively that whenever their res- 
pective forms of faith shall die, there will no longer be any security for peace, 
order, morality and human happiness. 

"What should be the characteristics of the antecedently probable book-reve- 
lation, judging from other antecedent probabilities? Alexander, in his " Evi- 
dences of [for] Christianity" gives notice that if any such question is to be 
asked and answered in advance, he will confess judgment at once. " If reason 
be permitted proudly to assume the seat of judgment, and to decide what 
a revelation ought to contain in particular; in what manner and with what de- 



SBC. III.] REASON SUPREME. 15 

gree of light it should be communicated : whether it should be made perfectly 
at once, or gradually unfolded ; and whether from the beginning it should be 
universal ; no doubt the result of our examination of the contents of the Bible, 
conducted on such principles, will prove unsatisfactory, and insuperable objec- 
tions will occur at every step of the progress." Mr. Alexander appears to 
acknowledge that reason is against him: but we know nothing of his "insu- 
perable objections ;" we are here to find the truth ; and whatever the result of 
our examination, provided that it be conclusive, it cannot be unsatisfactory. 

Reason, " proudly assuming the seat of judgment," would probably demand 
that a book-revelation, before being accepted by man and made the guide of his 
conduct, should be proved to be of divine origin by conclusive affirmative evi- 
dence on each of the following points: 

1- That the revelation was written by an author known to us by name and 
character. 

2. That the book was published by its author. 

3. That it was then received and extensively circulated as a divine revelation. 

4. That it has been preserved in purity as written. 

5. That the doctrines taught were original, 

6. That the doctrines are true. 

7. That they were undiscoverable by human reason. 

8. That the doctrines are more powerful for good than any mere human 
teaching. 

9. That the revelation is written with superhuman ability, and contains all 
the information in regard to religion and morality, undiscoverable by human 
reason and proper for man to know. 

Various able and celebrated advocates of Christianity have commented at 
length on all these points, as connected with the Bible, and in each have pre- 
tended to find strong evidence of the truth of their faith; and therefore it can 
hardly be considered unfair to consider them here as essential points. It has 
been said that conclusive evidence on each of these points should be necessary 
to prove that the Bible is a divine revelation. The burden of proof rests pro- 
perly upon Christianity: for it is a dictate of the plainest common sense that in 
religion, as in science and intellectual philosophy, every system should depend 
on the strength of the evidences in its favor rather than upon the weakness of 
the testimony against it. The fact that the Bible is in common acceptation, and 
that its enemies are and have long been the assailants, does not give its advo- 
cates the right to shift the burden of proof upon the other side ; for Christianity, 
though it may be the established form of faith as regards society in general, 
is not established in reference to the man who is about to examine whether it 
be true oi not; and such is the position of every man who takes up this 



16 AUTHENTICITY. [SEC. IT. 

book, with intent to give it a fair bearing. However, these remarks about the 
burden of proof are only intended to fasten the attention of the reader more 
closely upon the nature of the question. I claim to be able to furnish conclu- 
sive proof that Christianity is not of superhuman origin, and to obtain strong if 
not unanswerable evidence for the negative upon each of the cited points, 



THEXTICITY. 



IT. Do we know the human authors of the several books of the Bible, and 
were the books published while their authors were living, and then received as 
inspired t An affirmative reply to this question or to these questions is neces- 
sary to support the claim of Christianity to a divine origin. The theory in 
regard to all the alleged divine book revelations, is that they were written by 
men, acting under the influence of direct divine inspiration. Now, it is not 
probable that an omnipotent deity would choose to reveal his will for the 
guidance of all future generations of men, through men of no character or repu- 
tation, who should be forgotten so soon as life should leave their bodies. Much 
less is it probable that a blood-thirsty tyrant, a hypocrite, a coward, or a profes- 
sional thief, would be chosen as the medium of communicating truth to man from 
heaven. It is not enough to be ignorant whether the medium was bad ; we 
wish to know that he was good ; and a strong cloud must remain upon a book 
claiming to be a divine revelation, until all doubt upon that subject be removed. 

The books of the Bible in regard to the authenticity of which there is the 
most dispute, are the Pentateuch, Joshua,. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel,. Matthew, 
Mark, Second Peter, and Second and Third John. The authors of Judges > 
Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, and Esther, are not mentioned in these booka 
or in any authoritative tradition. 



THE PENTATEUCH. 



Y. The Pentateuch, as the first five books of the Bible are called, claims 
Moses for its author, (Deut. XXXI. 9, 2-4,) and was repeatedly accredited by 
Jesus. It is argued by Christian writers that the Pentateuch must have been 
authentic because it contained a complete and minute code of laws, and it is 
absolutely incredible that the Jews should have received such laws from a man 
whom they did not know, or that they should have accepted such a code with 
the assurance that it had long been in use in their nation ; the books of Moses 
describe the manner in which a number of the peculiar observances of the 
Hebrews began, such as the Sabbath, the feast of the passover, circumcision, 
&c. ; and there is always a natural and strong probability that the person 
reputed among his own nation to be the author of a book, did really write it. 
Now the Pentateuch, as the constitution and almost the only written law of 
Judea, must necessarily have always been before the eyes of the people, and in 
all ages Moses was held to be its author. 

The arguments to prove that Moses was not the author, or at least was not 
the sole author of the Pentateuch, are numerous. The presumption in favor of 
the authenticity of the book, because of its acceptation among the Jews, is very 
weak. That people was frequently conquered and subjected to the bitterest 
captivity — and once even removed to a distant land — after the ostensible era of 
Moses. During their captivities it is not probable they could preserve their few 
manuscripts. Soon after the Babylonish captivity, in the year 624 B. C, the 
Pentateuch, then an unknown book among: the Jews, was found by Hilkiah, a 
priest, which fact is certified by two books of the Bible, (2 K., XXII. 8 — 2 Ch., 
XXXIV. 14). When the King of Judea heard of the discovery of the ancient 
manuscript, of its claims to be a divine revelation, and of its inconsistency with 
the state of affairs in Judea at that time, " he rent his clothes," " saying, go and 
inquire of the Lord for me and for them that are left in Israel and in Judah, 
concerning the words of the book that is found." This fact of Hilkiah's 
discovexy, stated by an authority which cannot be denied by Christians, com- 



18 AUTHENTICITY OF THE PENTATEUCH. [SEC. V. 

pletely destroys the presumptions in favor of the authenticity of the Pentateuch 
drawn from the supposed publication of the laws during the lifetime of the 
author, the description of the manner in which certain ancient customs origi- 
nated, and the common belief among the Jews that Moses was the author of the 
Pentateuch. 

There is also much evidence to show that the book was not written till after 
the time of Moses. 

In Deut. XXIX. 28, the writer, speaking nominally as a prophet, and foretelling 
what Jehovah will do to Israel if the latter shall not obey the law and the 
priests, says that " then men shall say" " the Lord rooted them out of their 
land m anger, and in wrath, and in great indignation, and cast them into 
another land, as it is at this day" This is evidently a prophecy written after 
the Babylonish captivity, with the addition of a clause which betrays the fraud. 
A /am in Deut. XXXI V. 6, the writer says, "And he [the Lord] buried him 
[ Mossaj La a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor ; but no man 
k;:;.\veth cf his sepulchre unto thus day." So the writer of that portion of the 
Pentateuch, and of how much more is not known, lived so long after the death 
oi Moses that even the site of the tomb of the great prophet and lawgiver was 
forgotten. That same phrase "unto this day" used in similar manner, and 
furnishing equally strong evidence against the theory that Moses was the author 
of the Pentateuch, may be found in the following verses : Deut. III. 14, X. 8, 

XKIX.4: 

fa several passages there are evidently explanations written after the time of 
Moses ; as in Ex. XVI. 36, Deut. III. 5, XL 30, XXXII. 48, 49, Num. XXL 16. A 
book entitled " The Wars of the Lord" is spoken of, (Num. XXI. 14,) whereas 
there could scarcely have been such a book written during the life of Moses, or, 
if written, he would never have referred to it. 

The writer of the Pentateuch evidently did not dwell upon the same side of 
the Jordan with Moses. See Gen. 1. 10, Num. XXII. 1, XXXV. 14, Deut. I. 1, 5, 
III. 8, 20, 25, IV. 41, XL 30. 

The commandments are mentioned, (Ex. XVI. 28, Gen. XXVI. 5,) whereas they 
were not given till afterwards, (Ex. XX. 9). Priests are spoken of in Gen. XIV. 18, 
20, and Ex. XXI. 22, whereas priests were not chosen by Jehovah till later, (Ex. 
XXIIL, XXIX). The tabernacle is referred to in Ex. XXXIV. 34, 35, and was 
not built until afterwards, (Ex. XXX VI., XL). In Lev. XXV. 32, 34, the Levitcs 
are supposed to possess landed estates, which they did not acquire till long 
afterwards, (Num. XXXV. 1-5). Unclean beasts are spoken of when Noah was 
going into his ark, though the distinction between the clean and unclean was 
not made till many hundred years later, after the Israelites left Egypt. Tithes 
are mentioned (Gq:i. XXVIII. 22,) long before the giving of the law. The Gen- 



SEC. V.] ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXPRESSIONS. 19 

tiles are spoken of (Gen. X. 5,) before the promise to Abraham made a distinc- 
tion between Jew and Gentile. The writer of Genesis (XII. 6, XIII. 7,) says, 
" the Canaanite was then in the land," a remark whicji would not be made till 
after they were out; and they were expelled after the time of Joshua. In Lev. 
XVIII. 28, the expression is used " that the land do not vomit you out as it did 
the nations before you," but the nations remained in the land during the life of 
Moses. The names of " the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before 
there reigned any king over the children of Israel," are given in Gen. XXXTI. 
31, but there were no kings in Israel till 450 years after the death of Moses. 
The author of Exodus (XYI. 34,) represents the Jews as eating manna till they 
arrived at the land of Canaan ; but Moses did not live to get there. The Penta- 
teuch mentions a number of places not known to Moses ; such as Hebron, 
(compare Gen. XIII. 18, with Josh. XIV. 15, XV. 13,) Dan, (Gen. XIV. 14, 
Deut. XXXIV. 1, Jud. XVIII. 29,) Haroth-jair, (Num. XXXII. 41, Deut, III. 14, 
Jud. X. 34,) and Ophir, (Gen. X. 29, 1 K. IX. 28). In these verses there are 
numerous anachronisms of which a writer in the alleged position of Moses 
could not possibly have been guilty, but which were very natural in a later writer, 
who ante-dated his book. The early Hebrew prophets never mention Moses or 
refer to the ten commandments ; and in the books of Judges and Samuel the 
writers betray an ignorance of the Mosaic code which can only be explained on 
the supposition that it was unknown or not received as the supreme law of the 
land. 

These passages cited, and numerous similar passages which it is not worth 
while to cite particularly, show beyond a reasonable doubt that Moses did not 
write the Pentateuch in its present shape. But there is also proof that a large 
portion of the book could not possibly have been written by him. Genesis ap- 
pears, on close examination, to be a compilation from two older documents, 
containing similar accounts of the creation, the deluge, the generations of men, 
and the history of the Jews. This fact is admitted by most of the great biblieal 
and philological scholars who have written at any length upon the books of 
Moses within the last twenty-five years. These two ancient documents are 
styled the " Jehovistic" and "Elohistic," from the different names of " Jeho- 
vah " and "Elohim," which they respectively apply to the Deity. The "Elo- 
him " of the original Hebrew is translated " God " in the English version, and 
"Jehovah" is rendered as "the Lord." The Elohistic story begins with the 
first verse of Genesis and continues to the fourth verse of the second chapter; 
in which thirty-four verses the Deity is mentioned thirty-three times, and inva- 
riably as " God " in English, and " Elohim " in Hebrew. These verses give a 
complete history of the creation of the universe, with the works of each of the 
six days, and the rest of Elohim upon the seventh "from all his works which he 



20 AUTHENTICITY OF THE PENTATEUCH. [SEC. V. 

had made." On the fifth day the water at the divine command produced all 
fish and fowls; and on the sixth day land animals were called into life — man 
and women being the last, and created tog-ether. At the fourth verse of the 
second chapter the Jehovistic document begins, and relates another story of 
creation — a story complete in itself, and having no reference whatever to the 
Elohistic narrative. The creation is represented as having been completed in 
one day. The fowls were formed out of the ground. Adam was made before the 
beasts, and Eve last of all. These two narratives cannot by any possibility be 
made to harmonize. The two documents can be traced throughout the 
Pentateuch, and cause much confusion, and many contradictions, repetitions 
and inconsistencies. Both documents were evidently compilations of old 
Jewish traditions, but the authors had not received the traditions in the 
same shape. Thus, the Jehovistic tradition (Gen. IV., 16-24) says, that 
the decendants of Cain, Adam's eldest son, were Enoch, Irad, Mehujael, Methu- 
sael and Lamech ; while, the Elohistic compiler, speaking as though he had 
never heard that Adam had such a son as Cain, says (G-en. V., 3-26) that Serb's 
descendants were Enos, Cainaan, Mahaladel, Jared, Enoch, Methusaleh and La- 
mech. It is evident that the same traditional persons were referred to, but 
credited to different sons of Adam. Noah is directed by Elohim to take two of 
every species of animal into the ark (Gen. VI., 19, 20); but Jehovah directs him 
to take pairs of unclean beasts and sevens of clean beasts (Gen. VIII., 2). The 
story of the deluge is twice told. One of the most remarkable repetitions is in 
regard to the appropriation of the wife of one of the patriarchs by a foreign 
monarch. When Abram was seventy-five years old (Gen. XII., 4), and Sarai his 
wife was sixty-five, (Gen. XVII., 17), they were about to enter Egypt ; and the 
father of the faithful seeing that his spouse, notwithstanding her years, was yet 
a very beautiful woman, and knowing the amorous nature of the Pharaohs, be- 
thought him that it would be well to pretend that Sarai was his sister. They 
entered the valley of the Xile, and Pharaoh fell in love with the old lady and 
took her into his harem without opposition; but " the Lord plagued Pharaoh 
and his house with great plagues," till that monarch discovered that he was 
trespassing upon Abram's preserves, (Gen. XII., 10-19). Twenty-five years 
later, when Sarah, then only ninety years old, was apparently still beautiful, 
though "it had ceased to be with her after the manner of women," (Gen. XVIII., 
11), Abimelech siezed her at Gerar, after Abraham had told the same story as in 
Egypt about her being his sister. Twenty or thirty years later still, another 
similar event happened to Rebekah among the uncircumcised Philistines, who 
took her on Isaac's representation that she was only his sister, (Gen. XXVI). 
There is a contradiction about Abimehch's interview with Abraham and Isaac, 
between Genesis XXL, 22-34, and Genesis XXVL, 26-33, and there was evi- 



SEC. V.] 



PARALLEL PASSAGES. 



21 



dently only one interview. The manner in which Esau disposed of his birth- 
right is differently represented in Genesis XXV., 27-35— XXVII., 1-40. 

The following columns give the most important divisions of the Elohistic and 
Jehovistic papers ; and upon comparison of the passages many contradictions 
and awkward repetitions will be found, to which we have not space here to call 
attention in detail : 

Elohistic. Jehovistic. 

Creation Genesis L, 1— II., 3 Genesis II., 4 ; III., 24 



' V., 1-32 

« VI., 9-22 

< VII., 11-16 

< IX., 1-17 

' IX., 28 

< XL, 10-26 

< XVII 

1 XIX., 29 

XX 

XXL, 1-21 

: XXL, 22-34 

■XXII., 1-13 

XXIII. 
XXV., 1-18 

XXV, 19-21, 24-26 

XXV., 27-35 

XXVII.,46;XXVIII.,9.. 



IV., 1-26 

< VL, 1-8 ; VII., 1-5 

< VIL, 17, 23 
VIIL, 20-22 

< IX., 20-27 
X. 

XV. 
1 XIX., 1-28, 30-38 

< XII. 10-19,XXVI. 1-11 
XVI. 

< XXVI., 26-33 
1 XXIL, 14-18 



Genealogies 

Deluge 

Deluge 

Rainbow 

Noah 

Genealogies 

Abraham's Covenant 

Sodom 

Siezure of wife 

Isaac and Ishmael. . 

Abimelech 

Abraham tempted. . 
Abraham tempted. . 
Abraham tempted. . 

Isaac's marriage.. . . " XXV., 19-21, 24-26 " XXIV., XV., 22, 23 

Esau " XXV., 27-35 " XXVIL, 1-40 

Esau " XXVIL, 46 ; XXVIIL, 9 . . " XXVIL, 41-45 

Quails Exodus XVI. Exodus XL 

Commandments.. . . " XX., 1-13 Deut. V., 6-21 

Lord and Moses.... " VL, 30; VIL 12 Exodus IV., 10-16 

Horeb Num. XX., 1-13 " XVIL, 1-7 

Leviticus is principally Elohistic: the fragmentary character of Numbers 
may be easily discovered ; and Deuteronomy is mostly Jehovistic. De Wctte 
and many other very able biblical critics think that the Elohistic document was 
written about 1000 B. C, and the Jehovistic paper somewhat later. 

The evidence that the editor of the Pentateuch made his book by patching to- 
gether two old documents, is so strong that no author of reputation has made 
a serious attempt to refute it. Most of the advocates of the divine origin of 
Christianity dodge the question entirely, as Bishop Watson did in his reply 
to Puine's Age of Reason. Among the great scholars who have recognized the 
patchwork, are Eichhorn, Bauer, Astruc, Moeller, Illgen, Vatcr, Grainburg, 
Stachelin, Hartman, Ewald, Von Bohlen, Tuch, Kenrick, Palfrey and De Wette. 



22 AUTHENTICITY OF THE PENTATEUCH. [SEC. V. 

Archbishop Whately* confesses that the account given in Genesis of the Creation 
and of some other of the earliest events, is probably a tradition of an "ancient 
revelation, [reported to have been given before the time of Moses, but ignored 
by him,] and was very likely committed to writing long before the time of 
Moses." 

Palfrey, one of the most learned, able, candid and upright of the Christian 
authors, acknowledges that Genesis is formed by the union of fragments; but 
he contends that Moses was the editor, and intended Genesis merely as an in- 
troduction to the four inspired books of the law. In giving this law to the He- 
brews, Moses thought it proper to explain the history of Abraham, Isaac and 
Jacob, " what communications they had received from the Deity," what title 
they had to Canaan, from which they were about to expel other nations, and to 
show the origin of the religious observances of the Jewish patriarchs. All the 
information necessary on these points he found in old traditions, which he 
accepted and published as he found them. Palfrey says : " If we assume Moses 
to have been divinely instructed in what he recorded in Genesis, we do it alto- 
gether without authority from him. Communications received from the Deity, 
and recorded in the later books of the Pentateuch, he announces as such, saying 
repeatedly, 'The Lord spake unto Moses,' and 'The Lord said unto me.' Cut 
neither this language, nor any equivalent, anywhere occurs in Genesis. The 
reasons of the case would not justify the supposition. The introduction of a 
pure religious system into an idolatrous world is proper matter for direct reve- 
lation, nor without such revelation could Moses or any other man become pos- 
sessed of it. Not so with historical materials. On the one hand, the need of 
them is not so urgent; and on the other, it is the common course of things for 
them to be collected and handed down in a more or less pure and trustworthy 
state. Each age instructs its successor ; nor is it to be doubted that notices, 
such as they were, of earlier times existed in the time of Moses, as in every other 
period since there was anything to record or report. The actual existence of 
such notices before Moses' time, is referred to on the face of the record. Differ- 
ent parts of the composition are marked by varieties of style and language, 
effectually distinguishing them from one another, and indicating that they had 
several sources. The contents of such parts are sometimes of a nature to show 
hat they not only had not a common origin, but that they were not elaborated 
by Moses, when they had come into his hands, so as to make one consecutive 
and consistent narrative. I think we shall have occasion to own that different 
portions, distinguished by diversities of style referred to, sometimes repeat, and 
sometimes — which i3 of yet more consequence— contradict one another." Morell 

*" Th« Rise, Progress and Corruptions of Christianity." 



. v.| palfrey's t::~ 23 

makes an equally candid c 
theory, that — 
1. It is I _ :ated men pretending 

believe in the divine ins] 

8. The theory was not advanced till ffiible to defend the aaocr - 

tion that Moses was the sole autfa esfs. 

3. It cony »s of having] *d falsehood in the Holy S< 

and of having done his task as : liter badly. 

4. It reduces the accounts of the creation, the fall of man. 
antediluvians, the marriage of the sons of God with the da : men, the 
deluge, the confusion of tongues, the ... the choice of Abra- 
ham and the institution of circnm : 

5. The truth of Genesis and its I authorship ad in 
other portions of the Bi 

6. If the fall of man be a fable, there 
redemption, which is the corner-si 

Critics say that the style of the Peni ashed for s 

as that of Moses, and bears sn in the tin 

David. De Wette observes : u The opinion that Moses 
not only opposed by all tV. . later date, which occur in the t 

but also by the entire analogy of the history oi Hebrew literatui i 
But eveu admitting it was probable, ..- . i f the iuil a 

had on the language of the Hebrews, and on account ot the 
and Arabic tang at during a period of nearly a thuus 

Hebrew language had cha ronld appear o J 

from the slight difference between the style of I 

of the Old Testament, even : -.be 

absurd to suppose I man could have created b 

historical, the rl tnd poetic styles in all their 

have perfected these three depai . Hebrew literature, both ml 

substance, so for that all subsequent writers found nothing left for them but to 
follow in his steps." 

Thus much for the question whether Moses wrote the Pentateuch : and even 
if the proof were conclusive that he did write it, there is that 

the book was published and received as inspired during the lifetime of the 
author, as it ought to have been, if of divine origin. 



JOSHUA. 



VI. The book known as the book of Joshua claims to have been written by 
that chieftian (XXIV, 26), but the claim is not sustained by any satisfactory 
evidence, while there is a large amount of testimony to show that Joshua could 
not have been the author. The book remarks (VI. 27,) that Joshua's fame was 
noised throughout all the country : a mode of expression in regard to self in very 
bad taste for a mere human writer, but much worse if it pretended to have been 
written by divine inspiration. In XVI, 2, Luz is mentioned, but Luz was not 
built till after the death of Joshua ; (Jud. I, 26). The children of Dan are said 
to have taken Leshem (XIX, 47), but that place (Laish), is said in Jud. XVIII, 
27, 29, to have been taken long after. Joshua is, on two different occasions, 
reported to have taken Hebron and destroyed the place with its people (X, 36, 37, 
XI, 21), and yet the place appears afterwards (XIV, 12, 13) as not conquered 
after all. Debir was twice conquered and destroyed, according to Joshua (X, 
SS, 39, and XV, 17) : and, much later, it was again subjected to the same ope- 
ration, (Jud. I, 11, 13). Theodore Parker thinks that the author of Joshua 
had access to the documents at present contained in the book of Judges. 
Compare Joshua XV, I, 10 with Judges I, 20. 

*< XVIII, 12 with " 1,27. 

" XIX, 47 with " XVII. 

" XXIV, 28, 31 with " II, 6, 9. 

The Jebusites and children of Judah are represented in Joshua XV, 63, as 
dwelling together in Jerusalem to this day, whereas it is a well known fact that 
Jerusalem was not conquered till the time of David, (2. S. V. 5. 1. Ch. XI. 4.). 
We are not informed that the children of Judah dwelt any considerable time 
in Jerusalem before the conquest; and they could not possibly have dwelt there 
in the time of Joshua, as the phrase " to this day" would lead us to believe. A 
similar anachronism appears in Jud. 1, 7, 51. The book of Jasher is mentioned 
(Josh. X, 31) as authority for the miraculous arrest of the Sun, but according 
to 2. S. I. 18, the book of Jasher could not have been written till after the 
time of David. 



JUDGES. 



VII. The book of Judges bears the mark of having been written by different 
persons, but the date of its composition is not clear. Chapters XVII, XIX, XX, 
and XXI refer to a time earlier by twenty-eight years than XVI, two hundred 
and sixty-six years earlier than XV, two hundred and forty -fire years earlier than 
XIII, one hundred and ninety-five years earlier than IX, ninety years earlier 
than IV, and fifteen years earlier thean chapter I. The following passages bear 
the appearance of having been written after the alleged date of the book — I. 7, 
21. VI, 24. X. 4. XV. 19. XVII. 16. XVIII 30. XXI, 25. 



SAMUEL. 



VIII. The books of Samuel, originally but one book, sometimes called the 
" First and Second Book of Kings," do not profess, and are not claimed to have 
been written by the prophet Samuel, but appear to be named after him, because 
the record is mainly occupied with his acts, and the history of the Jews during 
his life. The numerous contradictions appear to show that the book is a 
compilation or collection of old papers. Compare 

Saul's knowledge of David, 1. S. XVI, 14, 23. XVII, 31, 40. XVII, 55. 
XVIII, 5. 

Direction of Hachilah, 1. S. XXIII, 19. XXVI, 1. 

Where David spared Saul, 1. S. XXIV, 10. XXVI, 5. 

Saul chosen King, 1. S. IX, 1. VIII. X, 16. X, 17, 27. 



26 AUTHENTICITY OF KINGS. [SEC. IX 

Saul's Death, 1. S. XXXI, 2-6, 8-13. 2, S. 1, 2-12, 

A number, 1. S. XVIII, 27. 2. S. Ill, 14. 

Anointment of David, 1. S. XVI, 1-13. 2. S. V, 1-3. 

Samuel's seeing Saul, 1. S. XV, 35. 1. S. XIX, 24. 

Archaeological expressions going to show that the book was revamped, if not, 
written after the date of the events recorded are found in 1. S. IX, 18. XIII. 
18. XXVII, 6. XXX, 25. 2, S. IV, 3. VI, 8. The book comes down osten- 
sibly to 1015 B. C, when David died ; but in I. S. XXVIII, 6, the phrase is 
used that " Ziklag pertaineth unto the kings of Judah unto this day :" an ex- 
pression which could hardly have been written till long after the separation of 
Judah and Israel,and that separation did not occur till after the death of David. 
The mistake in representing David is bringing the head of Goliah to Jerusalem, 
(l.S. XVII, 54,) as if that city had then belonged to the Jews, and been their 
national capital, while it was really in the hands of the Jebusites, could not 
possibly have been made till long after the time of David. It is not known, 
even by tradition, who was the author of the books of Samuel. 



KINGS. 



IX. The books of Kings, sometimes called the " Third and Fourth books of 
Kings," were originally one. They contain the history of the Jews from the 
accession of Solomon, 1015, B. C, until the revolt of Jeroboam and the ten 
tribes in 975, B. C, and the history of Judah from that time till 624, B. C. 
There is likewise a partial history of the rebel kingdom of Israel for 241 years 
from Jeroboam to Hosea. The phrase " unto this day" used frequently, shows 
that the narrative was written long after the occurrence of the events : See — 
l.K. VIII, 8. IX, 13, 21. X, 12. XIII, 19. 2. K. VIII, 22, X, 27. XIV, 7. 
XVI, 6. XVII, 23, 34, 41. It is supposed that the same author wrote or com- 
piled Samuel and Kings. 



CHRONICLES, 



X. The Chronicles are but one book in the Hebrew, and are styled " The 
Annals." Tney begin by giving the genealogy of David from Adam downward, 
and then commencing with David's elevation to power, they give the history of 
the Jews and the kingdom of Judah till the return from the Babylonish cap- 
tivity in 535, B. C. The writer of the Chronicles sought to glorify the kingdom 
and throne of Judah, and David particularly. He does not mention David's 
concubines, or his cruelty to the Moabites and to the men of Rabbah, or his mur- 
der of Uriah for the purpose of getting exclusive and indisputed possession of 
Uriah's wife, or his murder of Saul's seven sons, or the penalty threatened for 
the idolatry of his posterity, or the fact that he had seven hundred wives and 
three hundred concubines. All these things are mentioned in Samuel and 
Kings, of which the author or authors appear to hare been impartial. The 
writer of the Chronicles was not only partial to Judah but hostile to Israel, as 
may be seen by comparing 2. Ch. XX, 85-37, with the 1. K. 48, 49. The pro- 
ceedings on the occasion of the discovery of the laws of Moses in 624, B. C. are 
related very differently in 2. K. XXIII, 4-19, and 2. Ch. XXXIV, 3-7, 33. The 
author of Kings says, that the idolatrous priests of Judah had vessels for the 
worship of Baal in the temple, that the Sodomites had houses by the temple, 
that the cities of Judah had defiled the high places, that the kings of Judah 
had given horses to the Sun, and that Solomon had built high places for idola- 
trous worship. All these interesting items the Chronicles discreetly omit to 
mention. The history of Judah is brought down to 535 B. C. But the third 
chapter of the First Book gives the descendants of Jehoiakim, brother of king 
Zedekiah, for twelve generations later, reaching, at thirty years for each gene- 
ration, down to 360 B. C. 



EZRA AND NEHEMIAH. 



XI. The book of Ezra gives the history of Judah from 536 to 515 B. C. Ne- 
hemiah commences his story at 444 and comes down to 404 B. C. The book 
of Ezra is evidently a compilation, and not the work of one author. The second 
chapter is occupied with a genealogy which Nehemiah (VII, 5.) says he found ; 
and that expression means of course that he did not find it among the writings 
of an earlier prophet. That portion of Ezra between IV, 8 and VI, 18 is in the 
Jewish Bible written in Chaldaic and not in Hebrew. In Nehemiah XII, 
1-26, there is a list of priests down to Jaddua, who, as Josephus says, lived in 
the time of Alexander the Great. 



ISAIAH. 



XII. Isaiah began his vocation as a prophet in 759 B. C, and continued to 
follow his trade during the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, (I. I. VI, 1.) 
The first part of the book known by his name may have been written by him, 
but the latter part (XL. LXVI.) was certainly not. There is a strong difference 
of style between the two parts. The latter portion was written after the cap- 
tivity, at least one hundred years after Isaiah's death. Cyrus is mentioned by 
name, and he did not become known to the Jews till 540 B. C. ; and Jerusalem 
and the cities of Judah are spoken of as laid waste, as they were during the 
captivity, (XLII, 24. XL1V, 26, 28. XLV, 1, 13. LI, 3, 17. LII, 4, 9. LVIII, 
1£. LXIV, 9, 11.). The passages XIII, 1, XIV, 23, were not written by Isaiah. 
Chapter XXXIX ends in the midst of the history of Hezekiah, and chapter XL 
begins with something else. The rest of the book appears to be an exhortation 
to support the Jewish nationality after the return from captivity, which return 
did not occur till two hundred years after the time of Isaiah, 



J EKE MI AH, 



XIII. Jeremiah was a prophet from 629 to 588 B. C. (I. 2, 3. XL.-XLV.). 
Many of the later biblical critics are agreed in regarding the book of Jeremiah 
as a collection of older writings, though the greater portion of it may have been 
composed by one author. In LI, 64, it is said — " thus far the words of Jere- 
miah," and we must of course conclude that the remainder, at least, is spurious. 
Chapter LII was not written by the author of XXXVII, XXXVIII, and XXXIX, 
the first named chapter being a mere repetition of the last three. 



DANIEL. 



XIV. Daniel, says the Scripture, (Dan. I. 1, 6.) was taken by order of Ne- 
buchadnezzar, in the third year of king Jehoiakim, 607 B. C , to be educated at 
Babylon for a councillor: but Jeremiah says, (XXV, 1. XLVI, 2.) that Ne- 
buchadnezzar did not come to the throne till the fourth year of Jehoiakim. The 
author of Daniel says, that "Nebuchadnezzar made an image or statue of gold, 
ninety feet high, and nine feet through, to be worshipped:" a rather valuable 
image— a more valuable one than any nation of the present day could erect. 
Daniel is frequently mentioned, in the book named after him, with praise, 
(1.17,19,20. 11.12. VI. 4. IX. 23. X. 11.) Portions of the original are in 
Hebrew, and portions in Chaldee. The book is supposed to be of a compara- 
tively late origin. 



JOB. 



XV. Nothing is known of the authorship of Job, but Christian authors are 
generally agreed that the book would be better out of the Bible than in it. The 
description in the beginning of Job, of the levee day in Heaven, when God and 
Satan met on the most friendly terms, and agreed to join to tempt and afflict 
the good man, is very poetic, but not at all consistent with the Mosaic or 
Christian theology. A writer in the Westminster Review (Oct. 1553.) says: — 
" The book of Job is evidently not orthodox Jewish in its character. The more 
it is studied, the more the conclusion forces itself upon us, that let the writer 
have lived when he would, in his struggle with the central falsehood of his 
people's creed, he must have divorced himself from them outwardly as well as 
inwardly : that he traveled away into the world, and lived long, perhaps 
all his natural life in exile. Everything about the book speaks of a person 
who had broken free from the narrow littleness of the ' peculiar people.' The 
language, we said, is full of strange words. The hero of the poem is ofa strange 
land, a gentile certainly, not a Jew. The life, the manners, the customs are of 
all varieties and places — Egypt with its rivers and pyramids is there ; the des- 
cription of mining points to Phoenicia; the settled life in cities; the nomad 
Arabs, the wandering caravans, the heat of the tropics, and the ice of the north, 
all are foreign to Canaan, speaking of foreign things and foreign people. 

" No mention, or hint of mention, is there throughout the poem, of Jewish 
traditions or Jewish certainties. We look to find the three friends vindicate 
themselves, as they so well might have done, by appeals to the fertile annals of 
Israel — to the Flood, to the cities of the plain, to the plagues of Egypt, or to the 
thunders of Sinai. But of all this there is not a word ; they are passed by a6 if 
they had no existence; and instead of them, when witnesses are required for 
the power of God, we have strange un-Hebrew stories of the Eastern astronomic 
mythologv, the old wars of the giants, the imprisoned Orion, the wounded 
dragon, 'the sweet influence of the seven stars,' and the glittering fragments of 
the sea-snake Rahab, trailing across the northern sky. Again : God is not the 



SEC. XVI.] DATE OF COMPOSITION. 31 

God of Israel, but the Father of mankind. We hear nothing of a chosen people, 
nothing of a special revelation, nothing of peculiar privileges ; and in the court 
of Heaven there is Satan, not the prince of this world and the enemy of God, 
but the angel of judgment, the accusing spirit, whose mission was to walk to 
and fro over the earth, and carry up to Heaven an account of the sins ot 
mankind." 






MATTHEW. 



XVI. All that is known of the authorship of the first book of the New Tes- 
tament is that it was ascribed by the early Christians to Matthew, one of the 
apostles. The first mention made of it in any book, which has come down to 
us, is by Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis, who said in 116 A. D., — " Matthew wrote 
the divine oracles in the Hebrew tongue." Tradition says that it is the same 
book. Grey says : " It is the general tradition [mentioned by Papias, Irenseus, 
Origen, Epiphanius, Jerome and Chrysostom] of the early church, that Matthew 
wrote in Hebrew, which tradition is our only reason for supposing that Matthew 
wrote at all." Milman, a very high authority among the Christians says : (Affiix 
to note 153, Ch. XV, Milman's edition of Gibbon's Rome.) " The general opinion 
of learned hiblical writers is that the genuine gospel of Matthew was written in 
Hebrew. This gospel was addressed to the Jews, whom the author appears to 
have considered the only people entitled to salvation (Matth. X. 5. XV. 24) ; 
and of course a gospel for their benefit, written by one of their own race, ought 
to have been written in their own language. The original ancient gospel now 
exists only in the Greek : and the name of the translator, the faithfulness and 
date of the translation and the date of the loss of the original are alike unknown. 

The date of the composition of Matthew's gospel is a matter of dispute. The 
orthodox say that it was written and published within five or six years after 
the crucifixion of Jesns, but their only evidence is their belief that the faithful 
would not be left a longer time without a gospel. Hennell contends that the 
contents of the book show that it was written between 66 and 70 A. D.— 33 or 
37 years after the death of Christ. Chapter XXIV written in the prophetic 



32 AUTHENTICITY OF MARK. [SEC. XVII. 

style, agrees with events up to that time, and disagrees with them thereafter. 
The events prophesied [the prophecy being made after the event had occurred] 
in XXIV. 4. 5, happened about 55 A. D. (Josephus, War. II. 13.). In XXIV, 6, 
wars are faretold which happened in 66 A. D. (Josephus, "War. II. 16). The 
seventh verse foretels famines, pestilences, and wars, which are mentioned by 
Josephus ( War IV. 8, 9.), and Tacitus (Ann. XVI. 13.), as having happened 
about 65, 66, and 70 A. D. Verse ninth foretels the persecutions, which began 
64 A. D. In verse tenth it is said that a false prophet would come, and one came 
about 68 A. D. (Jos. War, VI. 5.;. The preaching of the gospel to all nations 
is promised in the fourteenth verse, and the churches planted by Paul did not 
nourish extensively till about 60 A. D. The abomination of desolation men- 
tioned in verse fifteenth refers probably to the entrance of Cestius into Jerusalem, 
and his attack on the temple A. D. 66. In verse sixteenth the Christians are 
advised to leave the city, and many of them fled about 56 A. I). In verse 
twenty-second, the term " elect" is used ; a word frequent in the late day of the 
Epistles, but not natural in the time of Jesus. Here the successful prophecy 
ends. In verses twenty-ninth and thirty -fourth the writer foretells the near 
approaching darkening of the Sun, the falling of the stars from Heaven, the 
mourning of all the tribes of men, and the gathering of the elect from all the 
four winds, which events were to come to pass in that generation. 



MARK. 



XVII. The second book of the New Testament is said by the tradition of the 
Church to have been written by Mark, a companion of Peter. Papias, Irenaeus, 
Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Eusebius, Epiphanius, Jerome, and Cbrysostom* 
Christian fathers living between 116 and 39S A. D. mention this tradition. The 
tradition further says that Peter approved of the gospel after it was written. 
Mark evidently copied from Matthew : compare, 
Matthew IV. 18, with Mark I. 16. 
VIII. 2, " 1.40. 

L" IX, " 11.14. 



SEC. XVIII,] AUTHENTICITY OF LUKE-, 33 

Matthew XIII, 1, with Mark IV. 1. 
XIV. 22, * « VI. 45. 

XIII. S3, * " IV. 33. 
The last twelve verses of Mark's gospel, as we now have i% were not -contamed 
in man}- of the early copies, as we learn from several of the fathers of the Church ; 
<and we have no positive information that feose verses were in any copies sill 
several hundred years after Christ, 



LUKE. 



"XVIIi. The authorsnip of the gospel of Luke, and of the Acts, is ascribed 
to Silas, sometimes called Luke, a companion of Paul. He is mentioned in Acts 
XV. 40. XVI. 3, 4, 6. Col. IV, 14. 2 Tim. IV. 11. Philem. 24. The first 
mention by tradition of Luke, as the author of these books, is by Xrenaeus 178 
A. D. and Origen 230 A. D., and Jerome 392 A. D., have the same tradition, 
Luke is said to have written in Greece ; and he is supposed to have written soon 
after Mark, (about 70 A. D.) and to have copied freely From him as well as Mat- 
thew. Compare — 

Luke IV. 1-12 with Matthew IV. 1-11, 

« IV. 38-44 * " VIII. 1*4 with Mark I. 40-45. 

« V. 18-38 " " IX. 2-8 " « II. 3-22. 

" VI. 1-11 u V " " II. 23. III. 6. 

To account for the similarity of the first three gospels, Eichhorn supposes 
that they must all have been derived from one original Aramaic document. 
Mill says: — "Nothing is plainer to me than that Luke borrowed the very 
phrases and expressions of Matthew and Mark> nay whole paragraphs) word for 
word," Wetstein says:— " That Luke took many things from Matthew, and 
more from Mark, appears on collating them," Michaelis remarks :— " It is 
wholly impossible that three historians, who have no connection, either 
mediate or immediate with each other, should harmonize as Matthew, Mark, 
and Luke do." 
2 



JOHN, 



XIX. The fourth book of the New Testament claims (XXI. 24. XIX. 26.) 
the disciple whom Jesus loved for its author: and tradition, of which the ear- 
liest record is found in Irenaeus, A. D. 178, says it was written at Ephesus by 
the Apostle John, after Matthew, Mark, and Luke had written. Fabricius, Le 
Clerc, and Hennell think it was written about 97 A. D. According to Hennell 
" this gospel appears to be the attempt of a half educated but zealous follower 
of Jesus, to engraft his conceptions of the Platonic philosophy upon the original 
faith of the disciples." Elsewhere the same critic says : — " The first three 
gospels agree very well in the style of the discourses attributed to Christ, which 
were chiefly parables and short pithy sayings. They represent him as begin- 
ning his public preaching in Galilee, proceeding after some time to Jerusalem, 
and suffering there. The chief topic dwelt upon is the approach of the Kingdom 
of Heaven : and they contain much concerning the fall of Jerusalem. But the 
gospel of John is of a very different character. The discourses of Christ are 
here long controversial orations, without any parables. He is made to journey 
from Galilee to Jerusalem and back again many times : the kingdom of Heaven 
is nearly lost sight of, the fall of Jerusalem never alluded to, and we have 
iastead of these several new subjects, viz : — the incarnation of the word or logos 
in the person of Christ; his coming down from Heaven, his relationship to the 
Father ; and the promise of the comforter or Holy Spirit. Also, with a few 
exceptions, a new set of miracles is attributed to Christ." 



REFLECTIONS ON THE AUTHENTICITY. 



XX. "We have thus cursorily examined the authenticity of the principal 
books of the Bible, and we have seen that it is highly probable that some of 
them were not written in their present shape by their reputed authors. There 
is little more than a weak presumption in favor of the authenticity of any of the 
books, while there are numerous and weighty evidences to the contrary in 
regard to most of them. Whether the books were published during the authors' 
lives, and then received as inspired, and extensively published, is also very 
doubtful. It should be remembered that this question of the authenticity of 
the books of the Bible is an important one, and very different from the question 
whether the works ascribed to Thucydides or Homer were really written by such 
persons as Thucydides and Homer are represented in our books to have been. 
The poetry of the Iliad is equally pleasing to us, whether we know the author's 
name or not. The discovery that he wrote to gratify a tyrant, to flatter a friend 
to slander an enemy, or to falsify history would not destroy the value of his 
poem, which depends for its rank upon its merit as a work of art. In regard to 
Thucydides, the knowledge that he had written his history falsely would detract 
from its value ; but provided it be true, we care little how base his motives or 
what the name of the writer, or his place of residence. The historv and the 
epic do not furnish rules for our conduct : we are not inclined to believe the 
historian and poet act from base motives : they are, as classes, great and high- 
minded men, and when one of their number stooped to baseness, he was always 
properly denounced by his brethren. A bad poem has never been palmed off 
as good, nor was an able and elaborate, but entirely false historical work ever 
palmed off upon the public as true. The historian has few motives to write 
falsehoods, and many motives to induce him to tell the truth. It is entirely 
different with the priest. Large numbers of priests have existed and do exist 
in nearly all countries on earth ; they teach many creeds, most of which are 
inconsistent with each other and must necessarily be false ; the priests know 
the falsity, but are base enough to make every effort to increase their power by 



■i-HviDg- tlie people deeper into sopeystifton, and for tfe«& purpose they wse the 
basest frauds,- That sush has been ll^e lastoFy of the priesthood in all ages and 
eouniries every oner will aeknowle%c ; . except so fa? as it eoneerss ^is own faith. 
J^ow one of the frauds most common and most profi&ibk baa been fc&e forgery 
of books olainnngto be inspired by Godyand to hare been written by the hand 
of some man of forme? times, Feprateefc to have been a grea$ saint : for the- 
success of one such fraud' may east the greater portion of the- political power r 
and :he wealth of a nation into the hands of a few men. 

The knowledge that such forgeries have been frequently committed', and that 
every such forger}', if successful, may be eons?de?ed as increasing and confirm- 
ing the power of the priests, does not necessarily pyore that every book claiming 
to- be a divine revelation must be fraudulent •„ but it should make us ssan the- 
testiraony very closely and- accept nothing, as inspired without conclusive prooX 



PRESERVATION, 



XXI. Has the Bible been preserved in purity as written ? If it were gives* 
as a revelation of truths most important to man, otherwise unattainable by him^ 
and necessary to be believed in their purity to save the human Face from ever- 
lasting torments— if it were given, as alleged, by a special inspiration, contrary 
to the ordinary course of nature — and if were intended for the instruction and 
salvation of all men subsequent to the time when it was first published on 
earth, it is but reasonable to believe that the divine goodness and omnipotence, 
so much praised in the book, would have provided that the revelation should 
be preserved in perfection as originally communicated. If we consider the 
condition of society, when the books of the Bible were first published, and for 
many centuries afterwards, the want of printing type, the great labor— even 
extending throughout a whole year — of making a manuscript copy of the 
Scriptures, the paucity of all kinds of books, the liability of books to be des- 
troyed, the ignorance of copyists, the strong probability that they would make 
some errors in copying a long work — all these things considered, it would be a 
miracle if the Bible had come down to us word for word as written : and if such 



SEC. XXI.] LOST GOSPELS. 37 

should appear to be the case on examination, that fact alone will furnish very 
strong evidence in favor of the theory that the book is a divine revelation. 
But if on the other hand, it has been allowed to take its chance with ordinary 
human works, and like them has suffered losses of important portions, and has 
had numerous passages corrupted, we shall be justified in entertaining very 
strong doubts, whether it be a divine revelation. 

The ancient Jews and the early Christians asserted most positively that the 
Scriptures accounted holy among them 3 had been preserved in the most perfect 
purity, the copyists and translators being under the supervision of the Holy 
Spirit, so that a mistake or error was impossible : and similar views continued 
to be upheld by a great many, even until a very late period. Justin Martyr 
said nothing more than what appeared entirely probable to the early Christian 
Church, iu asserting that when the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scrip- 
tures into Greek was made at Alexandria, the seventy learned translators were 
shut up separately in small cells, without the possibility of the slightest com- 
munication with each other, and when all had concluded, each his translation 
their works were fouud to agree throughout, not only in word but in letter ; and 
lor the truth of this story, the veracious Justin does not hesitate to vouch. 

But the faith in the perfect preservation of the gospels has been disappearing 
rapidly of late. No learned Christian writer pretends to uphold now the chro- 
nology of the Hebrew version of the Bible ; numerous errors are charged to the 
transcribers. It is a well-known fact that in the twelve hundred manuscript 
copies of the New Testament, which are now in existence, and have come down 
from ancient times, there are one hundred and fifty thousand different read- 
ings ; * and it is probable that there are at least as many variations in the 
ancient copies of the Jewish books. The Samaritan and Greek translations 
from the Hebrew differ very materially from the original in many places. The 
great majority of these variations are evidently mere trifles, affecting only the 
letter and not the spirit of the book, but other of the variations cause important 
differences of meaning. Besides, there is no method of knowing which copy is 
correct, or indeed whether any one of them is preserved exactly as it was in 
the first century of the Christian era. Not only are the books, which we have 
diminished in value by numerous corruptions, but many books spoken of in 
the Bible as inspired— by implication if not direct assertion— have been entirely 
lost. The following list gives the names of twenty lost books, with the passages 
in the Old Testament where they are mentioned. 

1. Book of the wars of Jehovah. Num. XXI. 14. 

2. Book of Jasher or Righteous. Josh. X. 13. 2. S. I. 18. 

3. Book of the Constitution of the Kingdom. 1. S. X. 25. 



* Palfrey's Evidences of Christianity. Lect. V. 



pp. xxr. 

- ; ree Thousand Frorerbs. 1 

IFiTe£ _~ K . - V.1S 

6. - 1. K. IV. 

r. Book of the. H 

. 1. K. XIT. 19. XVI. : 

idah. 1. K. XV 
10. 1. Ch. XXVII U 

present Book of 

1 - 

^anthepl Ch. XXIX S L 

13. Book of Gad, the Setrr. i. Ch. XXIX i :: _ 

i :. »; : : _ 

15. Visa 

1*5. Bock 

k Jeh«L L.Ch. xx:: 
;; H si - eprophc XT! i: 

: g a b XXX I II : . 

20. Lac :ould not ':. ons 

of Jeremiah, I ng book contained an Elegy on King Jo- 

not contained in 

In add:: g presumjjrions 

going to show that the Bible h I in perfect pnrity. The 

f these presumptions is founded upon the probability th 

a while ec : _ urefbllj and conscien- 

tious :;ond p^esurap: led upon the probability that the 

early manuscripts w the doctrir e 

ce the interests of the aliment of the e 

c ^ a: fallowed by the rise of numerous sects among them, 

who engaged in the 7 differed 

er circu r : : lgrimage5 leni, and 

my but Jc 
ration ; whether m: " whether Christ was a man or a god, or a 

union of both ; whether Marr v :her 

God was three or one ; whether salvation w or works 

mc: : would lire forever: whether : aid be burned 

up in that generation : and a great n s, equally foolish, and 

equally beyond the poss f proof; but all raised to a great importanc 

the popular belief that the rejection of the truth, even in small points of reli- 
gion, would be punished by » in hell. The adrocate* of the 



SEC. XXI.] FORGED GOSPELS. 39 

different sects did not hesitate to change the Scriptures to manufacture author- 
ities in their own favor. The extent, of the changes no one knows: but it. is 
certain that a gre.tt man}' religious sects, differing widely in their tenets, pre- 
tend to prove their doctrines from different portions of the same book. 

The evidences and instances of the early forgeries are too numerous to be 
given in full, but a short space will suffice to make a strong point. Celsus, who 
lived about 230 A. D., the earliest writer against Christianity of whose writings 
we know anything, complained that the Christians were continually changing 
and correcting their gospels. Origen replied to Celsus, and said that he knew 
of none who altered the gospels, except the Marcionites, the Valentmians, and 
perhaps the Lucanas. Eusebius said that the followers of Artemon presumed 
to alter the Scriptures. What evidence Origen and Eusebius had for believing 
that sects, to which they did not belong, and which they were bound to oppose, 
had altered the Scriptures, does not appear. It is pretty plain that the gospels 
differed, and had been made to differ by fraudulent means, but where the fraud 
w r as, whether on one or both sides, must remain a matter of conjecture. Ori- 
gen, the most learned Christian of his time, doubted the authenticity of 
Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, and Jude. Of course by express- 
ing a doubt of their authenticity he meant to say that they were probably 
forged ; and he had much information in regard to the matter, such as no 
person in this age possibly can have. Eusebius received as genuine only 
the evangels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and St. John, the epistles knowm as 1 
John, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Mosheim says, "the greatest and most learned 
doctors of the fourth century were without exception disposed to deceive a ad 
lie, whenever the interests of religion required it." Hallam remarks in his 
History of the Middle Ages, (Ch. VII.) that " many of the peculiar and promi- 
nent characteristics in the [Catholic] faith and discipline of those ages, [from 
the fifth to the tenth century] appear to have been introduced or sedulously 
promoted for the purposes of sordid fraud." Neander writes, in his history of 
the early Christian church, "the next ecclesiastical writers who come after the 
apostles are the so-called apostolical fathers, who came from the apostolical age, 
and most were the disciples of the apostles. * * * The writings of the so- 
called apostolic fathers are, alas ! come down to us for the most part in a very 
uncertain condition, partly because, in early times, writings were counterfeited 
under the names of these venerable m«n of the church, in order to propagate 
certain opinions or principles, partly because those writings, which they had 
really published, were adulterated, and especially so to serve a Judreo-hierar- 
chical party which would fain crush the free evangelical spirit. We should 
here in the first place name Barnabas, but it is impossible to believe the 
epistle ascribed to him to be authentic. * * * After Barnabas we come to 



40 PRESERVATION. [SEC. XXI. 

Clement, perhaps the same whom Paul mentions. (Phil. IV. 3.) He was a 
bishop of Rome at the end of the first century. Under his name we have one 
epistle to the church of Corinth, and the fragment of another. The first is 
genuine but is not free from important interpolations. * * * Under the 
name of this Clement two letters hare been preserved in the Syrian churches. 
* * * These epistles altogether bear the character of having been counter- 
feited in the latter years of the second or third century, partly in order to 
enhance the value of celibacy, partly in order to counteract the abuses which 
rose up under a life of celibacy." 

If there was such a disposition to forgery among the early Christians, and if 
so many forgeries were committed in religious books, as is represented, it is no 
more than reasonable to believe that attempts would be made to tamper with 
the gospels. I have already remarked that the last twelve verses of Mark were 
not contained in some of the early copies of that gospel, and were considered 
by many as a forgery. Gibbon- remarks that " the word ' which' in 1 Tim. 
III. 16, was altered to ' God' at Constantinople in the beginning of the sixth 
century, and this fraud with that of the three witnesses is admirably detected 
by Sir Isaac Newton." 

A third presumption against the theory that the Bible has been preserved in 
perfect purity is in a tradition contained in the Apocrypha, a work of no little 
authority in such matters. Esdras (XIV. 21 of his second book) says, " Thy 
law is burned ; therefore no man knoweth the things which thou hast done or 
the works that are to begin. But if I have found grace before thee, send down 
the holy spirit into me and I shall write all that hath been done in the world, 
since the beginning, which were written in thy law, that men may find thy 
path, and that they which will live in the latter day, may live." And in verse 
45 he says, " And it came to pass that when the forty days were fulfilled, that 
the highest spake, saying, 'the first, that thou hast written, publish openly that 
the foolish and unworthy may read it: but keep the seventy last, that thou 
mayest deliver them only to such as be wise among the people.' " Whether 
this be true or false, it must necessarily raise doubts in regard to the purity of 
our present gospels. Irenseus said it was the prevalent belief among the Chris- 
tian fathers in the second century that Ezra had republished the lost and 
corrupted books of the old Jewish law. It is stated in 2 Mac. II. 13, that Nehe- 
miah found and gathered the books. 

Not only was there a strong disposition to corrupt the gospels, but there 
were excellent opportunities, since all the copies were made by hand with the 
pen ; and, worst of all, the frauds once committed were almost out of the reach 
of detection. There were few learned men among the Christians, their copies 

* Note IT to Ch. XLVII. of the Decline and fall. 



SEC. XXI.] ERRORS CONFESSED. 41 

of the gospel were few, some of the books were not received as inspired for 
several centuries after their composition, and were not carefully preserved, and 
when accepted as inspired were received with a reverence that did not stop to 
doubt at the most wonderful or unreasonable doctrines or statements contained 
in a "gospel." Home, Bengel, Kennicott, Houbigant, Adam Clarke, and 
Markland, who have all written comments upon the Bible much esteemed by- 
various Christian churches, are agreed that the copyists of the Scriptures have 
accidentally or intentionally erred in copying different passages. Eichhorn 
says, u Our four gospels in their present shape were not in use and were not 
known till the end of the second century ; previous to that time it is supposed 
that other gospels were in circulation, allied to those which we now have, but 
not the same." Morell gives it as his opinion that " with few exceptions there 
is not an entire book in the whole of the Old Testament, with respect to which 
we can determine, with complete accuracy who was the author — when it was 
written— at what time received into the canon of the Scripture — and on what 
especial grounds. The sum and substance of our certain knowledge (leaving 
out mere Jewish tradition) is that the different books were collected together 
sometime after the Babylonish captivity, accepted by the Jews as divine writ- 
ings, and read accordingly in the synagogue. Now under such circumstances 
as these, how are we to stand forth and maintain the inspiration of the Jewish 
writings on the hypothesis, either that they were all dictated by the spirit of 
God or written by express commission from Heaven ? Only let it be affirmed 
that either of these notions is necessary to complete the conditions of a truly 
inspired book, and what chance have we of being successful in proving the 
inspiration of the Old Testament against the aggressions of the skeptic?" 

Besides all this the books now included in the Bible were only a few of those 
published and at one time received as inspired; and the. selection of our 
inspired gospel for us, and the rejection of the uninspired, all having been 
previously of equal authority, was made by rules, and for reasons, unknown to 
us, in a dark age, by men whom we know to have been filled with debasing 
superstitions, and to have been parties to numerous and gross frauds. The 
selections were made about 300 A. D., in the very atmosphere of priestly fraud. 



ORIGINALITY. 



XXII. Were the doctrines of the Bible original with the authors of that 
book? If they were, there is a strong presumption that it is of a higher than 
human origin. The doctrines taught in the book under consideration may be 
classified under three heads : 1. Rules of religious action. 2. Rules of moral 
action. 3. Rules of political action. The Bible was not written till men had 
lived man}* centuries upon the earth, nor till many studious and great men had 
thought deeply and written wisely of religion, morality, and civil government. 
These are subjects upon which original ideas are scarce, and he who would in 
this day compose an entirely new set of practicable rules fur the action of men 
under any circumstances in which they might be placed, would be almost 
entitled to recognition as an inspired prophet. If on the other hand it appear 
that the ideas advanced in the Bible are not original, we shall be justified in 
presuming that the book is a mere fraudulent human compilation. Where 
would be the necessity or propriety of revealing from heaven something that 
was previously known among men ? It has been said that to induce men to 
observe the laws of morality, it was necessary that thej T should believe that 
these laws were directly sanctioned by the Almighty God, that their violation 
would be visited by his wrath and eternal vengeance, and that, to give this 
sanction, a revelation was required. This argument may be worthy of conside- 
ration, though it might be used as well in favor of a counterfeit as of a geuuine 
revelation. At least no one will deny that it would be far moie satisfactory to 
believers to have an entirely original revelation than to have a mere rehash of 
long-recogmzed truths. Unfortunately for the claims of the Bible to be a God- 
given revelation, it does not contain one important doctrine of a general charac- 
ter which can be proved to be original, while there is conclusive proof in regard 
to most of the ideas, and strong evidence as to the remainder, to show that they 
were learned by the Hebrew prophets and Christian apostles from the priests 
and philosophers of the Heathen nations, or from that general sense of right 
and propriety which is common to all naturally intelligent peoples. 

There was a wonderful similarity between the religious doctrines aud ceremo- 



SEC. XXII.] ANTIQUITY OF EGYPTIAN RELIGION. 43 

nies of the Jews and Egyptians — a similarity too great by far to permit any 
reasonable man to believe that those nations derived their creeds and forms 
from different sources. This similarity will reduce us to a dilemma — we must 
believe either that the Egyptians copied from Moses, or that the latter copied 
from the former; and if the Hebrew law-giver be proved to have obtained his 
ideas from the Egyptians, we can hardly be expected to believe that he got them 
from Jehovah. Now for the question whether the Jews copied from the Egypt- 
ians or the Egyptians from the Jews. It was the common belief among the 
most intelligent of the ancient Greeks that the kingdom of Egypt, with its civil 
and religious forms, reached back into the most remote antiquity, far earlier 
than any other nation near the Mediterranean. Such was the opinion of Solon, 
one of the most learned men of his time, and he formed his opinion after con- 
rersing with the priests of Memphis. Herodotus says that when he visited 
Egypt, the priests took him into a large consecrated chamber, and there showed 
him the wooden statues of all the high priests of the kingdom, three hundred 
and forty-one in number, going back consecutively from his time to the founda- 
tion of the monarchy ; and these statues had been made in the life-time of the 
respective originals, " who were all men and the sons of men." The Egyptian 
priests said the Greeks in their religion were children, — a remark indicative 
of high civilization and long culture — a remark such as the philosophers of this 
day make of the ancient Greeks — and a remark which our forefathers four or 
live hundred years ago were not sufficiently cultivated to make. 

The Egyptians had an elaborate religious creed and a complex ceremonial. 
Kennck says : " Superstitiously attached to their sacred institutions, and pro- 
fessing a religion which admitted much outward show, the Egyptians clothed 
their ce»emonies with all the grandeur of solemn pomp; and the celebration of 
their religious rites was remarkable for all that human ingenuity could devise 
to render them splendid and imposing. They prided themselves on being the 
nation in which originated most of the sacred institutions afterwards common 
to other people." If the history of Abraham and his descendants, as given in 
Genesis, be true, the Jews when they entered Egypt were a few score of rude 
shepherds, who had never dwelt m houses, or had a permanent place of resi- 
dence, who were unskilled in all the higher arts of civilized life, ignorant of 
letters, and destitute of enlightened, clear or positive ideas of religion or govern- 
ment. At this time (1700 B. C.) Egypt was already a kingdom of long standing, 
containing a dense and prosperous agricultural population, long accustomed to 
dwell in houses, skilled in the arts of peace and war, familiar with the use of 
hieroglyphical letters, and living under social, political and religious systems 
among the most complex ever devised by man. These facts are not denied and 
cannot be controverted ; and they are in substance asserted by all the great 



44 ORIGINALITY. [SEC. XXII. 

and celebrated men who have investigated the antiquities of Egypt. Wilkin- 
son observes, " It is indeed a remarkable fact that the first glimpse we 
obtain of the history and manners of the Egyptians, show us a nation 
already far advanced in all the arts of civilized life; and the same cus- 
toms and inventions that prevailed in the Augustan age of the people' 
after the accession of the eighteenth dynasty are found in the remote age 
of Osirtasen, the cotemporary of Joseph, nor can there be any doubt that 
they were in the same civilized state when Abraham visited the country." 
In the midst of this polished nation the Hebrews lived, poor, rude, engaged 
in an occupation particularly degrading in the eyes of the Egyptians, and 
finally reduced to unconditional slavery. Moses was born on the bank of 
the Nile, he was bred in the family of the Pharaohs, and he could not have 
avoided learning much of the politics and religion of the Egyptian king- 
dom. The author of the Acts, writing ostensibly b} T divine inspiration, says, 
" Mcses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians." Under the leader- 
ship of Moses, the Jews escaped from Egypt, and after they entered Arabia, 
their chief gave them a code of laws, which are found to bear a wonderful re- 
semblance to the laws of the land they had left. Under these circumstances, 
what reasonable man can believe that the Egyptians copied from the Jews? The 
former, a long-established and prosperous nation before the Jews existed, pow- 
erful, civilized, particularly priding themselves on the antiquity of their religious 
institutions, — could they in the height of their prosperity, while the children of 
Israel were still always at war or in captivity with the Philistines, have 
copied the institutions of a hostile and despised and enslaved race, which 
had no laws until after it escaped from the brick-yards of the Nile. If 
there were any room for doubt, it would be removed by an examination 
of the existing monuments of the ancient Egyptians. The paintings and 
sculptures on the temples, obelisks and pyramids preserved for nearly, if 
not. quite, four thousand years, confirm in the most explicit language 
the assertion of Wilkinson, that the customs of the country were the same long 
before the time of Moses as they were when Solon and Herodotus visited Mem- 
phis to learn wisdom, and returned to their native land with the opinion that 
the Egyptians were not only the most ancient but also the wisest of nations. 
Let us now examine whether, and in how far the religious institutions, ceremo- 
nies and ideas of the Hebrews and Christians resembled the institutions, cere- 
monies and ideas of the Egyptians and of other peoples. 

Moses gave to his followers a sacred book, but before Abraham was born, the 
Egyptian priests had had their sacred books. The holy Vedas of the Bramins 
were written, as Sir William Jones thinks, about 1500 B. C, near the time of 
Moses. There were also sacred books in China and Persia in ancient times, 



iEC, XXIlJ| OOSPELS, TElffPLES, PRIESTS, 4S 

•and there ie ne evidence $hat the-j did not eslst as early as the "FentatewSa. 
'The books of Moses contained an account of the creation o-f the universe, the 
-early history of the human Face, tfce origin of the Jewish people, £be genealogy 
-of the principal families, a code of political, social and religious la\v£ an£ pro- 
phecies of future events. The sacred books of the Egyptians an£ other nations 
^contained similar ^matter. Oiodorus IBieulus teKs us that many of the ancient 
fawgiver-s, far tho purpose o-f securing the supremacy and -permanence of their 
laws, pretended that the latter were of di-vine origin. 

The Jewish legislator established a priest-hood with great -wealth and apolitical 
power, and ma&e the priestly oUke 'hereditary in one .family or tribe, as had 
feeen done e&any^eentoies earlier* in .the valleys of Mae Nile, the Euphrates and 
the Ganges. 

Solomon erected a\em-|Ke to the 'Lord one thousand years before Christ, 'but 
temples to the gods were oommon ; ln Egypt, Chaldea, Phesnicia and Eindostan, 
■-many fc.ges previous to that -time, "Ruins of reiigiaus edrnoes built while the 
Jews were as yet unknown, -are still standing on the sites of Memphis -and 
'Thebes. In I S. T. i, it is said that the Philistines had a -temple to ©agon 
'before the -time of-goiomom Bishop fCtite gives it as%is opinion, -from the de- 
-scription <ji the 'holy of hohes, that that place ^was an adytum [-a secret apart- 
ment] without windows.''* According to l%L,WV£l.l% '^Tne Lord said -lie 
-would dwell in a thick darkness/' The Egyptian temples kafi an -adytum 
-without windows, for the accommodation of their divinities. 

Among the Israelites, and in accordance with the Mosaic laws, there were 
-men who were prophets hy profession-, there were also prophets among 
heathen nations — the Egyptians,, Greeks, Ph«?nlcians, -Persians and Chal- 
deans, Herodotus, who lived 466 yeans ^before -Christ, wrote.; a The art of 
•predicting future events in =the Greek temples 'Came- also from the Egyptians 
-and it -is -certain that tiiev were the ofirst -people who established festivities, 
pnbik assemblies, processions, and the proper -mode of eo-mrnuning with the 
Deity." Fet we learn from Homer that some of the Grecian oracles were 
already celebrated at the time of the Trojan war (1100 H «€!.) 

The Jews had an Ark of the Goveu&nt, (Josh. -£IL, 13 ; 2 6., X¥. 24 ; 1 Cm, 
XV., 2, 15,,) a box in which the I^ord was supposed 'to -make his home; and sc 
sacred was it, that according to Moses, its mere touch was death to ah' but the 
priests. This ark waseopied from the "Egyptian ark, sacred boat or gi eat shi 
■which was carried in procession 'by the .priests,, as the Mosaic ark was tooros by 
•the Levites. The gods of the ancients were supposed to travel ^ousideraoly, 
iind to %e eirtit'ied to the most nono£-abie conveyance known. In the hills and 
plains of Greece, a chariot was the most honorable mode of coir. eft -nee, and in 
'. ror i L , || p[ f . ture^, the go&B are represented it 1 their chariots. Btti the se 



4(5 ORIGINALITY. [SEC. XXII. 

portion of Egypt was confined to the bottom land of its great valley, subject to 
overflow every year, and intersected with large and numerous canals. There 
chariots were little used, and boats were the more ancient and honorable means 
of conveyance ; and, accordingly, the gods of Egypt were painted as sitting in 
boats and carried about in procession in boats. Moses did not see why his 
divinity could not travel in a boat as well in Judea as in Egypt, and therefore 
he just adopted the boat shrine. The Ark of the Covenant had at the ends two 
" cherubim," little figures composed of a chubby child's face with a pair of 
wings. There were similar guardians on the Egyptian arks ;* but it is supposed 
by some that these figures were intended originally to represent a sacred beetle, 
the scarabseus. 

The religious ceremonies of the Hebrews bore a remarkable resemblance to 

those of the Egyptians. The Jews considered Jerusalem a holy city, (Is. II., 2 ; 

Ps. LXVIII., 15,) and attributed great religious merit to pilgrimages thither. 

In the valley of the Nile there were holy places also. The great temple of Ar- 

emis, at Bubastis, is said to have been visited by 700,000 pilgrims annually. 

The Egyptians offered sacrifices of vegetables and animals to the gods, and so 
did the Jews.f The priest of both nations slew the sacrificial animals in the 
same manner, by cutting the throat. The Egyptians preferred red oxen, without 
spot, for sacrifice; and Moses directed the selection of a red heifer, (Num. XIX., 
2.) The custom of the scapegoat (Lev. XIV. 21.) was common to both nations. 
A sacred fire was kept continuelly burning in the temples of Thebes as well as 
in Judea., (Lev. VI., 12, 13.) The Egyptian priests took off" their shoes in the 
temples, and Joshua took off his shoes in a holy place, (Josh. V. 16.) The 
Egyptian priests danced before their altars, and the same custom prevailed in 
Jerusalem, (Ps. CXLIX., S). The practice of circumcision, claimed by Moses 
as a divine ordinance, communicated to Abraham, is proved by the monuments 
of Egypt, according to Wilkinson, to have been fully established there, at a 
time long antecedent to the arrival of Joseph. The Egyptians had their un- 
clean meats, including pork, as well as the Jews. The Egyptians annointed 
their kings and priests long before there were any kings or priests in Israel. 
The Urim and Thummin (Ex. XXXIX., 8, 10; Lev. VfII.,8,) which play a 
stupid part in the books of Moses and Jo. Smith, were once not inappropriate 

* Kenrick says : on the model of an Egyptian shrine, " the ark of the covenant of 
the Hebrews appears to have been constructed, which contained the tables of the law, 
the pot of manna, and the rod of Aaron. The mixed figure of the cherubim, which 
were placed at either end and overshadowed it with their wings, has a parallel in some 
of the Egyptian representations, in which kneeling figures spread their wings over the 
shrine." 

'See Appendix, note 4. 



SEC. XXII.] IDEAS OF DIVINITY. 47 

figures of Re, the god of light, and Thraeif the god of justice, worn on the 
breasts of Egyptian judges. 

Moses taught the existence of only one God, or at least the Jews of a late 
period believed in and worshipped only one God, The Egyptian people wor- 
shipped many gods, but the priests of Egypt as well as of ancient India were 
monotheists. There was one doctrine for the initiated, another for the vulgar. 
The deity was called " I am" in Hebrew ; and the same term is applied to the 
deity in the ancient Hindoo "Menu," and was applied by the Phoenicians 
to their great god. The Jews held the name Jehovah in great reverence, and 
the common people were prohibited to speak it. except on very rare occasions ; 
and the Egyptians held the name "Osiris" in similar reverence. Even Hero- 
dotus, after having been at Memphis, when writing about that divinity, would 
not use his name. Moses represented Jehovah as having a human shape, 
coming downjto earth, visiting and conversing with men, causing all the occur- 
rences of nature by immediate efforts of his will, frequently performing miracles, 
and empowering men to do miracles, and to foretell the future, choosing indi- 
vidual men and a particular nation to be his favorites, and establishing certain 
families to be kings and priests of his "peculiar people" for ever. Such ideas 
were familiar to all the ancient nations about the eastern shore of the Mediter- 
ranean. Jehovah led the armies of Israel to battle : and the gods of the Greeks, 
Phoenicians, and Egyptians were also reputed to be terrible in warring for their 
worshippers. The Hebrew Scriptures, in some passages, exhibit a high con- 
ception of the divine attributes. According to Robertson, the following was 
the idea of God, as expressed by the ancient Bramins: — "As God is immaterial, 
he is above all conception ; as he is invisible, he can have no form : but from 
what we behold of his works, we may conclude that he is eternal, omnipotent, 
knowing all things, and present everywhere." Moses represents many of the 
most important events of the early history of the world to have happened in or 
near Judea : and almost every ancient nation held the same views in regard to 
its own soil. An orator in the Island of Crete, on a public occasion, once spoke 
thus: f " Upon this Isle all the arts were discovered. Saturn gave you the 
love of justice and your peculiar simplicity of heart. Yesta taught you to erect 
houses. Neptune taught you to build ships. You owe to Ceres the culture of 
grain, to Bacchus that of the vine, and to Minerva that of the olive. Jupiter 
destroyed the giants which threatened you. Hercules delivered you from the 
serpents, wolves, and other noxious animals. The authors of so many benefits, 
admitted by you to divine honors, were born on this soil and are now occupied 
in laboring for your happiness." Cory, in the preface to his " Ancient Frag* 

*In Greek Themis, the goddess of justice. 
t So given in Barthelemy's Anachareii. 



48' ORIGINALITY. [SEC. XXII. 

aaents," says : " In ancient times it was the prevailing custom- of all the- 
i&itions, including Egypt, India, Phoenicia, aud Greece,, to- appropriate to them- 
selves, and assign within? their own territorial'limits, the localities of the grand 
events of primeval history, with tbe birth and achievements of the- gods and 
heroes,, tbe deluge, the origin of the- arts, anc&the civilization of mankind," 

The history of Creation, as given in Genesis^ is a mere compilation of ancient 
traditions prevalent in tbe East, and: similar traditions are given by Sanchonia- 
$han, an old Phoenician author. Moses informs us tbat Abraham was the- 
chosen Sivorite of Jehovah, and was to be tbe father of" the chosen people.. 
This name- Abraham- is probably derived from tbe Hindoo Brahm»„ * the great 
spirit,, the origin of all things, the- creator of att other eaastenees. Abraham 
was called Abram until late in life, according* to Gen. XVI F. 5, and he is. said) 
to have come from Ur-of'tbe Chaldees, a point east of Canaan;, either on- the- 
Euphrates or farther east — possibly Hisdostan itself, the lome of Brarninism, 
His name, his birth place, and his position as father of tbe chosen* people, all* 
suggest a derivation from tbe Hindoo Brahm.. In Ex. VI.. 3, it is said', that u God 
was net known to Abraham, Isaac, and- Jacob by tbe name of Jehovah." This- 
is-probably true, for- Jehovah was a Phoenician word, and tbe Jews did not 
learn the Phoenician,, or as we new call it tbe Hebrew tongue, till they retarnedi 
from- Egypt, and- settled in Canaan, aaiongtfoe Phoenicians.. 

Tlius we have gone over the most prominent points wherein? the ideas ad- 
vanced in tbe Old Testament resemble the ideas accepted among many nations. 
txistmg during tke time of the Jews. Although Moses evidently derived his 
principal doctrines from the Egyptians,, yet the latter nation, had' many usages 
and principles of religion and. politi « s^whioh the Jews did. not see- fit to adopts 
^he Egyptians believed in the immortality of tbe soul, in future rewards and 
punishments, in tbe adoration of numerous animals, and in the woxship o.? 
idols. It is. a matter of wonder that Moses rejected the doctrine of a future 
\ife; : but bis creed was certainly purer and higher on most; points than the 
greeds, of the heathens of western Asia... 

Next in. order comes the consideration of tbe question whether tbe doctrines, 
taught in the New Testament were original with Christ and the Apostles? — 
^he im-mor tali ty of the soul, and future rewards and punishments, were not 
1 .a&ghtin any -portion-, of the Old Testament, and not even hinted at in the 
fcooks- of Moses., but were inculcated by Josus, after they had long been accepted 
among, the Hindoos,. Egyptians-,, and- Greeks,, We have to- this day the works; 
ot Plato and Ciesro, in which those great ph'-losopbers ch&cussed tbe question 
of a future- life before the beginning, of the Christian era. 

* Branny derived frooa»tke same root as thfi Latin word primus, (f>rst>, the Celtic- 
ircrc] priorrJi (chief), and the Gothic WQX&JrwVt (origin, beginning). From tab }as£ 
wscctojor "-trcur^is derived,. 



SEC. XXII,] HEATHEN TRINITIES. 49 

The dogma that God is threefold in his nature, or three in one, wa3 familiar 
to the Egyptians, but was rejected by the Jews, and was adopted by the Chris- 
tians, who made Jesus the second oerson of the Godhead. The doctrine of the 
Trin ty, the triune nature of the deity, was familiar to the Hindoos. Tenne- 
maun, in his " Hist >ry of Philosophy," sp aksthus of the ancient Braminical 
doctrine in regard to God. " The supreme being of the Hindoos is Brahm, — 
incomprehensible by any human understanding: peiwading aud comprehend- 
ing all things. Originally he reposed in the contemplation of himself; subse- 
quently his creative word has caused all things to proceed from him, by a suc- 
cession of continued emanations. As creator he is named Brahma; as the 
preserving power, Vishnou ; as the destroyer and renovator of the forms of 
matter, Siva. These three relations of the divine being co :stitute the trinity of 
the Hi Ktoos." Braminism was older than Buddhism, and the latter was esta- 
blished at least six hundred years before Christ. * That the Egyptian creed was 
older than the faith of tne apostles is not to be denied. Wilkinson mentions 
the Egyptian trinity thus : " The great gods of Egypt were Neph. Amun, Pthah, 
Kbem, Sate, Maut, Bubastus, and Xeith, one of whom generally formed, in con- 
nection with other two, a triad, [Trinity] which was worshipped by a particular 
city or district, with a peculiar veneration. In these triads, the third member 
proceeded from the other two ; that is, from the first by the second— thus, the 
intellect of the Deity, having operated on matter, produced the result of these 
two uuder he form and name of the world, and on a similar principle appear 
to have been formed most of their speculative combinations. The third mem- 
ber of a triad, as might be supposed, was not of equal rank with the two from 
wh^m it proceeded; and we therefore lind that Khan so, the third person in 
the Th ban triad, was not one of the great gods, as were the other two, Amua 
and .Maut: Horus, in the triad of : hils, was inferior to Osiris and Isis ; and 
Anouke to Xeph and Sate, in the tri:>d of Elephantine and the Cataracts." 

The New Testament teaches that Je.-us was lhe second person of the God- 
head, a God, and that he was born of a virgin, impregnated only by the Holy 
Ghost, or third person of the Godhead, that he lived in the shape of a man for 
thirty-three years ou earth, was crucified on a charge of crime by the officers 
of Rome, and by his death and suffering atoned for the sins of mankind. The 
idea of such a redeemer is nowhere advanced in the Old Testament, bu it 
was fannli r to many heathen nations of antiquity. According to Hitter, 
" the doctrine of Buddhism [established tiOO B. C, in HindostanJ contains 
nothing but the main idea of the heroic poems of the Bramins, fully understood 
and consequentially carried out — ttut is, that a man freeing himself by holiness 
of co duct from the obstacles of nature, may deliver his fellow men from the cor- 

* Dr, Ritter in his History of Ancient Philosophy, chap. II, 



50 ORIGINALITY. [SEC. XXII. 

ruption of their times, and become a benefactor, redeemer of his race, and also 
become a supreme God— a Buddha." Wilkinson says : "At Philae, where Osiris 
[an Egyptian Divinity, who came down to earth to battle with Typho, the evil 
spirit] was particularly worshipped, and which was one of the places where 
they supposed him to hare been buried, his mysterious history is curiously 
illustrated in the sculptures [made 3,600 years ago] of a small retired chamber 
lying nearly over the western Adytum of the temple. His death and removal 
from this world are there described ; the number of twenty-eight lotus plants 
points out the period of years he was thought to have lived on earth ; and his 
passage from this life to a luture stat? is indicated by the usual attendance of 
the Deities and Genii, who presided over the funeral rites of ordinary mortals. 
He is there represented with t e leathered cap, which he wore in his capacity 
of Judge of Amenti, and this attribute shows t.ie final office he held after his 
resurrection, and continued to exercise toward the dead at their last ordeal in a 
future state." Again : " Osiris was called ' the opener of truth,' and was said 
to be ' full of grace and truth.' He appeared on earth to benefit mankind, and 
after having performed the duties he had come to fulfill, and fallen a sacrifice 
to T\ r pho, the evil principle, (which was at length overcome by his influence, 
after leaving the world,) he arose again to a new life, and became the judge of 
mankind in a future state." * Herodotus saw the tomb of Osiris at Sais, nearly 
five centuries before Christ. Similar redeemers were worshipped in other 
lands, aud like Jesus many of them were born of virgins. Grote, Speaking of 
the early legends of Greece, remarks that " the furtive pregnancy ot young 
women — often by a gocl — is one of the most frequently recurring inc dents in 
the legendary narrative." St. John speaks of Christ as the "Logos" the 
word. Millman f admits that the term "logos 17 was a term in frequent use 
in Greece and Egypt before it was used by St. John. The meaning of the 
" logos" and of the trinit} 7- which makes three gods of one god, and one god of 
three gods is exceedingly dark, but there is a ray of light in Abel Remusat's 
description of a Hindoo trinity of a god, his law or word, and the union of 
both. 

The Christians abandoned the ceremonial law of Moses, and adopted baptism 
and prayer as important portions of their new system; but in these matters 
they only foil -wed the Essenes of Judea, and the Therapeutae of Egypt ; sects 
described by Josephus and Philo. The Essenes exalted the merit of humility 
and religious contemplation, and the contempt of worldly goods ; they often 
lived with their property in common, and in these points they were imitated by 

* According to the New Testament Christ is to be the judge of men in the next 
world. 

t Note to Gibbon'6 Rome. 



SEC. XXII.] ALL-SUFFICIENCY OF LOVE. 51 

the Christians. The Essenes were a sect of Jadaistic Buddhists, having evi- 
dently derived many of their ideas from India ; and they gave tone to the new 
Christian Church. The Christians soon needed a ceremonial for their worship, 
and they found it among the Buddhists. * Hue was astonished to find that 
the ceremonies of the Buddhist priests in Mongolia and Thibet were scarcely 
to be distinguished from those of the Catholic Church. In the centre of Asia, 
he found heathen monks, nuns, and priests, with gowns and surplices, and 
shaven crowns, with beads and bells, lighted candles and smoking incense, 
genuflections, chants and prayers, and masses for the dead, and all t..e tedious 
trickery of Rome. Since Buddhism is much older than Christianity, we must 
believe that the Catholics have stolen their ceremonies, until there be some evi- 
dence to the contrary, and we know of none as yet. 

But it is claimed that the great merit of the New Testament is in its 
moral teachings, which are not only perfectly pure, but are also entirely 
original. These moral teachings are contained in such expressions as " Love 
thy neighbor as thyself," "Love is the fulfilment of the law," " Return good for 
evil ;" and " all that ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto 
them, for this is the law and the prophets." The fact that such phrases are 
made the foundation to claims of originality or peculiar merit, shows the igno- 
rance of the people, and the unscrupulous policy of the clergy. The doctrine 
that love is the fulfilment of the law, taught in the New Testament with much 
emphasis, and the chief merit of the book in the eyes of many, is as old as hu- 
man society. It was taught by Plato in almost the identical words ascribed to 
Jesus. We still have the writings of the great teacher of the Academy, wherein 
he says " Love f is peace and good will among men, calm upon the waters, 
repose and stillness in the storm, the balm of sleep in sadness. Before him all 
harsh passions flee away, he is the author of soft affections, destroyer of un- 
gentle thoughts, merciful and mild, the admiration of the wise, the delight of 
the gods. Love divests us of alienation from each other, and fills our vacant 
heart* with overflowing sympathy : he is the valued treasure of the unfortu- 
nate, and desired by the unhappy, (therefore unhappy because they possess 
him not,) the parent of grace, of gentleness, of delicacy : a cherisher of all that 
is good, but guileless as to evil ; in labor and in fear, in longings of the affec- 
tions, or in soarings of the reason, our best pilot, confederate, supporter and 
savior." It so happens that St. John, who only of the Evangelists, lays a pecu- 
liar stress upon the all-sufficiency of love, had an opportunity of becoming 
thoroughly indoctrinated in Platonism, by his long residence among the Greeks 
at Ephesus. St. John was the only one of the Evangelists who taught that 

* Hue's Travels in Tartary, Vol. 1, Ch. Y. Vol. 2, Ch. II, III. 
t See Mackay's Progress of the Intellect, V. 21. 



52 ORIGINALITY. [SEC. XXII. 

Christ was the logos of which Pluto had said so much. Christianity is only a 
corrupted Platonism grafted upon the Mosaic Law. 

Men were always possessed with a mental constitution similar to our own : 
the rudest savages have the same affections and passions which actuate citizens 
of enlightened nations. In all ages women have been found to love their chil- 
dren ; friends have been ready to aid each other at great cost to themselves; 
soldiers have been willing to sacrifice themselves for their country. The dis- 
position to act kindly and justly to others is born with all men, and he who 
claims originality for expressing it is a shameless impostor. Long before 
Christ, philosophers had taught that men should give to others the treatment 
they desired for themselves. Confucius expresses the sentiment in almost the 
very words used by Jesus five hundred years later. Thaies * (600 B. C,) 
taught that we must " do nothing which we would blame in another." Iso- 
crates f (400 B. C.) says : " Treat your parents as you would wish your parents 
to treat you." " Let your most secret acts be as though you had all the world 
for witnesses. Do not expect that reprehensible words will be forgotten ; you 
may hide them from others, but never from yourself. Devote your leisure 
hours to hearing counsel from the wise; alleviate the sufferings of the virtuous 
poor; the rec llection of charity well applied is one of the most precious forms 
oi wealth. If you should be clothed with a high office, let your subordinates 
be upright men, and when you leave your posi ion, let it be with honor rather 
than with wealth." There is nothing more elevated in all the New Testament 
than the following from the Enchiridion of Epictetus: "Remember that you must 
behave at life as at an entertainment. Is anything brough, around to you, put out 
your hand, and take your share with moderation. Doth it pass by you, do not 
stop it. Is it not yet come, do not stretch forth your desire towards it, but wait 
till it reaches you. Tims do with regard to children, to a wife, to a public 
office, to riches, and you will some day be a worthy partner of the Feast of the 
Gods. And if you do not so much as take things which are set before you, but 
are even able to despise them, then you will not only be a partner of the Feast 
of the Gods, but a sharer in their Empire also." 

The doctrines of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Cicero, in regard to the conduct 
of men toward each other, will suffer nothing by a comparison with the teach- 
ings of Jesus. Herder says that the morality of the ancient Bramins was pure 
and elevated. Sir Wm. Jones has expressed his admiration of the spirit of the 
institutes of Menu; and Dr. Arnold speaks in high praise of the greatness of 
soul exhibited by the Stoics. No chastity can ever surpass that of Lueretia; 

* Diocenes Laeriius, Lib, I. sec. 35, 38, quoted in Bartbeleiny's Anaeharsis, Ca, 
XXVIII. 

f Otusted in Dartheiemy's Anacharsis, Chap. XXVIII, 



SEC. xxil| 



GOSPEL OF LOVE. 



53 



no honesty that of Aristides ; Washington's disinterestedness was not purer 
than that of Timoleon ; and on a comparison of the conduct of Socrates and 
Jesus, during trial and execution, the latter can certainly claim no pre- 
eminence. And yet we are asked to believe that Christ was the author of the 
teaching — " Do to others as you would have them do to you." The demand is 
preposterous. It would be equivalent to asking us to believe that in the ages 
before Christ, and in the lands where his teachings are unknown, there was and 
is no honesty, no truth, no friendship, no peace, no human society; that all men 
were then and are there liars, thieves and murderers; that, in fact, man is 
entirely wanting in the knowledge of what is right, or the disposition to do it, or 
both, until he has heard and believed the words of Jesus. The influence of tfc* 
priestly lies in regard to the originality of Christ's teaching of the all-sufficiency 
of love, is so great that many, knowing their falsity, dare not declare it. The 
Rev. Mr. Milne, in the preface to his translation of the Chinese "Sacred Edict," 
expresses a fear that he shall be condemned for furnishing proof that before Jesus 
was born, a morality as pure as his was inculcated in the Celestial Empire. 
Milman is one of the few Christian authors who have had the manliness and 
honesty to acknowledge that the New Testament morality was not new. 
Indeed, many of the moral precepts in that book, upon which so much stress is 
laid, were contained in the Old Testament. Moses said : " Love thy neighbor 
as thyself," (Lev. XIX., 18, 39) ; and Micah asked, (VI. 8,) "What doth the 
Lord require of thee, but to do justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly 
with thy God." A comparison of the following passages will show how the 
authors of the New Testament made use of the milder portions of the Jewish 
Scriptures : 

with Prov. XV. 32, XXIX. 23, Micah. YI. 8. 
Ps. CXLYII. 8, XXXVII. 11, Is. LXI. 1-3 

Y. 6, 8, " Is. LVIII. 10, XXXIII. 15, Ps. XXIY. 3. 

Y. 16, " Prov. IY. 18. 

Y. 33, 39, " Prov. XX. 22, XXIY. 29. 

Y. 42, " Ec. IY. 5, Deut, XY. 8. 

YI. 11, " Prov. XXX. 8. 

YI. 13, " 1 Oh. XXIX. 11. 

YI. 14, " Ec. XXYI11. 2. 

YI. 19, 20, " Ec. XXIX. 11. 

YI. 25, " Ps. LY. 22. 

VII. 12, " Tobit. IY. 15. 

XVIII. 17, " Ec. XIX. 19. 

XXII. 40, " Dent. IV. 5, Lev. XIX. 18. 

Luke XII. 19, 4< Ec. XL 19. 



Compare Mat. Y. 3, 4, , 



54 ORIGINALITY. [SEC. XXII. 

Jesus may be entitled to all the honor ot having been the first teacher of the 
doctrine of passive submission to all wrong and oppression ; and a proper view 
of the circumstances in which he was placed will leave no doubt that this doc- 
trine, so singular and slavish to us, was natural and even absolutely necessary 
to him. He was determined to claim to be the Messiah foretold by the Hebrew 
prophets and long awaited with anxiety b} T the Jewish nation — the Messiah, the 
descendant of David, who should be their king, break the yoke of the Gentiles, 
and restore Judea to her former wealth and power. The Messiah of popular 
expectation was to be necessarily the enemy of the Romans ; but Jesus soon 
found that it was useless to think of rerolting against Rome. The Jews were 
so restless under the Roman yoke, so ready to revolt, and the Romans were so 
quick to punish any one suspected of sedition, that Jesus was compelled for 
the purpose of saving his own neck to inform both Hebrews and Romans by a 
public declaration of his doctrine, that his kingdom was not of this world, and 
that it was a sin to resist the powers that be, since they all are ordained of 
God ; and to make his doctrine consistent, he forbade his followers to resist evil. 

The teaching that belief in Jesus as the Son of God is the highest virtue or 
merit before the Almightj- is not original. Crishna, a Hindoo divinity, says: 
" Works affect me not, nor have I any expectations from the fruit of works. 
He, who believeth me to be even so, is not bound by works." - 

Thus I have considered the claim of the writers of the Bible to the origi- 
nality of the principal ideas advanced in that book; I have endeavored to 
prove the negative, and the reader must form his own opinion whether I have 
succeeded. If he agree with me that the doctrines of the Bible are not original, 
perhaps he will ask, (as Strauss asks about the later Jewish nDtions in regard 
to the angels and their names) were these ideas false so long as they existed 
among the Gentiles ? And have they become true by adoption in the Jewish 
[and Christian] mythology ? Or have they been true through all time? And 
have idolatrous people discovered truths of such an elevated character sooner 
than the people of God ? 

* Mackay's Progress of the Intellect, V. 6. 



TRUTH OF DOCTRINES. 



XXIII. Are the doctrines advanced in the Bible true ? If not, the claims 
that that book is divinely inspired must be abandoned. It is not sufficient that 
some of the doctrines should be true, or that there should be that defective 
approximation to truth which characterizes many human compositions. Xo 
book can deserve to be considered a revelation from heaven, unless every doc- 
trine in it be not only true but accompauied by evidence of its truth eanying 
conviction to all intelligent minds. The Bible claims to be inspired by God, 
and it must be strictly examined in proportion to the extravagance of its pre- 
tensions. Christ affirmed the divine authority of the Old Testament, Mat V. 
17, 18, XV. 4-7, XXII. 31, XXIV. 15, &c.) Some of the New Testa: 
writers affirmed their own inspiration, ,1 Cor. VII. 39, 40; 1 Thes. IV. 6-8, V. 
23, 2s ; 2 Pet. III. 1-4, 14-16 ; 1 John, IV. 4-6). The inspiration claimed for 
the Bible is a superhuman wisdom, or rather a divine wisdom, given by God 
himself to his prophets for the instruction of men. Dr. Knapp defined it to be 
"an extraordinary divine agency upon teachers, while giving instruction, 
whether oral or written, by which they were taught what and how they should 
write or speak.'' Christians dispute among themselves whether the inspiration 
of the Bible be plenary or partial ; whether Jehovah dictated the very w 
or whether he inspired the writer with the idea and left the latter to find their 
own language, and that perhaps faulty. Plenary inspiration was the received 
doctrine of the whole Christian church until of comparatively late years, and 
was not abandoned until the assaults of skepticism made it untenable. The 
same change of opinion in regard to the nature of inspiration occurred with the 
Grecian oracles. M When superstitious people," says Xeander, "thought that 
the God himself inhabited the priestess of the Delphic oracle, and spoke through 
her mouth, so that everything literally came from Phoebus himself, and when, 
on the contrary, the infidels tried to turn this representation into ridicule, and 
quoting the bad verses of the Pythian prophetess, laughed at the notion of this 
coming from Apollo, Plutarch thus replied — ' The language, the expression, the 



56 TRUTH OF DOCTRINES. [SEC. XXIII • 

words, and the metre, come not from God but from the woman. The God only 
presents the image to her mind and lights up in her soul the lamp which 
illumes the future. The God uses the soul as an instrument, and the activity 
of the instrument consists in the property of representing as purely as possible 
what is communicated to it. It is impossible that it should be repeated per- 
fectly pure, — nay, without even a large admixture of foreign matter.' " 

The apostles held that the very words of the Old Testament were dictated by 
Jehovah, as appears from the following passages : 

" God, who at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past unto 
the fathers by the prophets." lleb. I. 1. 

Paul speaks of" the word of God." Heb. IV. 12. 

" God spake by the mouth of David." Acts IV. 25. 

The Holy Ghost spake by Esaias the prophet. Acts XXVIII. 25. 

The first testimony usually adduced by the advocates of the Bible to prove 
the truth of its doctrine, is that furnished by the miracles and prophecies of the 
Hebrew prophets and of Christ and his apostles. These miracles and prophe- 
cies will deserve a little consideration, 



M I'KACLES. 



XXIV. In regard to the miraculous evidence adduced to prove the truth 
and divine origin of the Bible, I shall make the following points:— 1. Miracles 
are an impossibility. 2. If miracles were wrought, man could never distinguish 
them from the works of human skill. 3. The miracles related in the Bible were 
never wrought. 4. If the Bible miracles were wrought they would not suffice 
to prove the doctrines of the Bible to be true. 

And first, What is a miracle ? Hume defines it to be "a transgression of the 
laws of Nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by interposition of some 
agent." It is such a transgression as necessarily exhibits superhuman power. 
If an act appear to be a transgression of known laws, but be really in conformity 
with laws unknown, then it is no miracle, any more than many acts which 
learned and skilful men do every day, appear to the ignorant to be miracles. 



SEC. XXIV.] MIRACLES NOT RECOGNISABLE. 57 

The ability to foretell eclipses, and to describe, a moment after their occurrence, 
events happening in far distant countries, would appear to the savage to be in 
violation of the laws of Nature and therefore miraculous, but we know that 
they are in accordance with natural laws. 

Secondly, What evidence toll suffice to prove a miracle? None. There is no 
record in history that any man ever had sufficient evidence to believe any act to 
be a miracle. It is impossible to know whether the laws of Nature be violated, 
because man can never be certain that he knows all the laws of Nature. The 
savage is laughed at who believes a civilized man to be possessed of miraculous 
power when he throws a dead body into convulsions with a galvanic battery, or 
when he, by means of a telescope or a magnetic telegraph, discovers what is 
going on at a great distance; yet we bear the same relation to Christ which 
the savage bears to civilized man. If Jesus were to appear in California and 
perform all the miraculous acts ascribed to him in the New Testament, he would 
acquire little credit for the possession of supernatural power. If he turned 
water into wine, he would be called a good juggler; if he cured the blind and 
lame, and raised the dead, he would be esteemed as an unequalled physician ; 
if he caused the heavens to grow dark, he would be accounted a great meteoro- 
logist; if he rose up to heaven, he would have the credit of having invented a 
flying machine. But as for any pretension of ability to violate the laws of 
Nature — why the thing is ridiculous. If a man were to order the sun to Cease 
forthwith to shine in clear noonday, and if the sun should so forthwith cease to 
shine, that man would not be entitled to any more credit than the man who can 
foretell an eclipse. Their powers would be equally miraculous to a man who 
knows nothing of astronomy. If, however, it be insisted that the restoration of 
a dead man to life suffice to prove miraculous power, theu ought not a good 
juggler's trick, well performed, prove as much ? To breathe fire is as inexpli- 
cable by natural laws (as they are generally understood by educated men) as to 
cure the blind and lame by a word. 

But let it be granted that certain acts, inexplicable by natural laws as usually 
understood, shall be considered as miracles, what evidence shall suffice to prove 
these miraculous events ? The evidence should be either that of the senses or 
the best secondary evidence possible. It has been said that "a miracle is no 
miracle at second-hand;" and it truly would be a difficult matter to satisfy a 
man by hearsay-testimony that his neighbor had eaten two hundred pounds of 
tenpenny nails for breakfast with a beneficial effect upon his s^ystem. But if 
such an event could be proved by secondary evidence, that evidence ought to 
show that the alleged miracle was performed in the presence of many sensible 
and unprejudiced witnesses, that those witnesses recorded the circumstances of 
the miracle and published the records at the place and near the time of the per- 



58 MIRACLES. L SEC ' XX1V ' 

formance of the miracle, that those records agreed with each other in the essen- 
tial points, and that the records were received with respect if not with credit. 
That the evidence should prove this much, at least, will be clear to all who are 
familiar with history, and who know that several instances have occurred where 
the evidence went quite as far as demanded, and yet nobody believes in the pre- 
tended miracles, or even thinks seriously on the subject.* 

In considering the reports of miracles in ancient times— for no sensible man 
believes that any are performed no\v-a-days— it should be remembered that the 
ancients were not acquainted with the natural sciences, and were incompetent 
to form clear ideas of the weight of testimony. If a man solemnly asserted that 
he had seen a priest raise a dead man to life, his assertion was considered suffi- 
cient proof of the event, because every body at that time believed in the power 
of working miracles and in the daily occurrence of special providences. It is 
only by education that a man learns to judge of probabilities. A child can be 
induced to believe almost anything, and the men of ancient times— many even 
of the most intelligent — were but children as compared with the men of this 
age. The Emperor Julian, one of the earliest writers against Christianity, did 
not deny the miracles of Christ, because he did not doubt them. He supposed 
that miracles were performed every day. The books of Moses gravely tell us 
that the Egyptian priests changed their rods by a word into serpents ; and 
another biblical writer says that the Witch of Endor raised the dead Samuel 
from his grave and caused him to speak to Saul. 

Some of Dr. Middleton's remarks on the pretended miracles of the early 
Christian Church, will apply quite as well to those of the prophets and apostles : 
" Whatever be the uncertainty of ancient history, there is one thing at least 
which we may certainly learn from it— that human nature has been always the 
same ; agitated by the same appetites and passions, and liable to the same 
excesses and abuses of them in all ages and countries of the world : so that our 
experience of what passes in the present age will be the best comment on what 
is delivered to us as concerning the past. To apply it, then, to the case before 
us : there is hardly a single fact [fraudulent miracle] which I have charged 
upon the primitive times, but what we still see performed in one or other of the 
sects of Christians of even our own times. Among some, we see diseases cured, 
devils cast out, and all the other miracles which are said to have been wrought 
in the primitive Church ; among others, we see the boasted gifts of Tertullians' 
and Cyprian's days, pretended revelations, prophetic visions and divine impres- 
sions. Now, all these modern pretensions we readily ascribe to their true 
cause, to the artifices and craft of a few, playing upon the credulity, the super- 
stition and the enthusiasm of the many, for the sake of some private iuterest. 

* £ee Appendix, note 5. 



SEC. XXIV.] EXAMINATION OF ALLEGED MIRACLES. 59 

When we read, therefore, that the same things were performed by the ancients, 
and for the same ends of acquiring a superiority of credit, or wealth or power, 
over their fellow creatures, how can we possibly hesitate to impute them to the 
same cause of fraud or imposture ? 

"In a word, to submit our belief implicitly and indifferently to the mere force 
of authorit}^ in all cases, whether miraculous or natural, without any rule ot dis- 
cerning the credible from the incredible, might support indeed the faith as it is 
called, but would certainly destroy the use of all history, by leading us into 
perpetual errors, and possessing our minds with invincible prejudices and false 
notions both of men and things. But to distinguish between things totally 
different from each other, between miracle and nature, the extraordinary acts of 
God and the ordinary transactions of man, to suspend our belief of the one, 
while, on the same testimony, we grant it freely to the other, and to require a 
different degree of evidence for each in proportion to the different degrees of 
their credulity, is so far from hurting the credit of history, or of anything else 
which we ought to believe, that it is the only way to purge history from its 
dross, and to render it beneficial to us, and by a right use of our reason and 
judgment, to raise our minds above the low prejudices and childish superstitions 
of the credulous vulgar." 

Were the miracles reported in the Bible actually performed ? The Christian 
will answer in the affirmative, and in support of them say that the testimony of 
the word of God is sufficient. But we are now considering whether the Bible 
is the word of God, and whether the miracles prove it to be so. If the 
miracles are to prove the inspiration, it will not do to make the inspiration 
prove them. They must be examined precisely on the same principles as we 
would examine similar stories in profane books. Let us examine the record of 
the miracles. 

The coufusion of tongues is reported by a person who confesses that he 
knew nothing of the event from his own knowledge, and hearsay testimony will 
not do for a miracle. We must have at least as good evidence to gain a seat in 
Heaven as to gain a case in law. Philologists are agreed that the varieties in 
the languages of the people of Western Asia and Europe were brought about by 
slow corruptions, proceeding from natural causes only. 

The report of the plagues of Egypt (Ex. VII., VIII.,) was not written or pub- 
lished till long after the alleged date of the events. 

The report of the arrest of the sun at Joshua's command to permit him to kill 
the Amorites, (Josh. X., 12-14,) has no title to credence. Such an event could 
not have happened without a record being made of it in China, Persia, India, 
and Egypt — countries where astronomy was studied, where observations were 
taken, and where records were preserved, but where no record is to be found of 



60 MHU.CLE& |skc. XXIV. 

this miracle. The Chinese books make a genuine report of an eclipse which 
occurred five hundred years before the time of Joshua. 

Joshua stopped the sun ; but Isaiah compelled that luminary to turn round 
and travel backward for more than half an hour in time, and ten degrees in 
distance. (Is. XXXVIII.,, 7. 8 ; 2 K., XX. 8-11). This miracle is reported to 
have happened only 700 years before Christ ; but it wants the confirmation 
which it would have had, if true, in the records of China, Hindostan, Egypt and 
Greece. 

Matthew (IV. 18, 19) and Mark (I. 16-20) say that Jesus selected Peter as an 
apostle while the latter was fishing in the sea of Galilee. Luke (V. 1-11) tells 
of the calling, and adds a miraculous draught of fishes. John makes another 
addition of a miraculous fire to cook the fish, and he also changes the date of 
the event, and makes it happen after the resurectiou. John wrote after Luke, 
and Luke after Mark and Matthew. Hennell remarks : "In such instances the 
gradual enhancement is very different from wilful falsehood, since the additional 
particulars doubtless seemed no less probable in themselves than edifying to 
the Church." It has been by some writers supposed that the Evangelists refer- 
red to different miracles, but that supposition is contradicted by similarity of 
the circumstances as related by the different authors. The scene was at the 
Sea of Galilee: Peter, James and John were present; they were fishing ; Jesus 
promised that Peter should fish for men ; the fishermen forsook all to follow 
him; when Jesus came they had caught nothing; and Jesus commanded the 
casting of the net. 

Matthew (III. 16,) and Mark (I. 10,) say that when John baptized Jesus, he 
saw the spirit descending like a dove. Luke (III. 22) says that the spirit de- 
scended in a bodily shape like a dove. John (I. 82) adds, that this had been 
foretold by John the Baptist. 

The miracle of turning water into wine, at the marriage in Caua, is reported 
only by John, (II. 1), though "it did manifest forth the glory" of Jesus. John 
says: "When they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him — 'They 
have no wine.' " On this, Hennell observes : "There is no reason why Jesus 
should be applied to for wine, which it was the duty of the host to furnish ; but 
however unnatural the application in reality, it was quite natural on the part of 
the writer who was to prepare the way for the event," Yet even after this 
miracle, Jesus' relatives, who were present, did not believe on him. 

Matthew says (VIII. 15) that Christ healed Peter's wife's mother, and " the 
fever left her, and she arose and ministered unto them." Mark sa3~s, (I. 31), 
" immediately the fever left her, and she ministered unto them." Luke (IV. 
38, 39) says: "it was a great fever," and "immediately she arose and minis- 
tered unto them." "Now, the variations," as Hennell remarks, "though per- 



SEC. XXIV.] FEEDING OF THE MCLTlTt/JDE, til 

haps made innocently, are important; for the reality of the miracle depends 
upon the greatness of the fever and upon the patient's exhibiting immediately 
some visible sign of recovery, such as rising." 

The miracle of the casting out of the demons loses nothing in its progress. 
Matthew (YIIL 16) says " They brought unto him many that were possessed 
with demons; and he cast out the spirits with his word, and cured all that were 
sick." Mark says, (L 32) : " They brought wnto him all that were diseased, 
and them that were possessed with demons, and all the city was gathered to- 
gether at the door, and he healed many that were sick of divers diseases, and 
cast out many demons, and suffered not the demons to speak, because they 
knew him," Now hear Luke (IV. 40) : " All they that had any sick with divers 
diseases brought them unto him, and he laid hands on every one of them, and 
healed them, and demons also came out of many, crying out and saying :■ ' Thou 
art Christ, the Son of God ;' and he rebuking them, suffered them not to speak ? 
for they knew that he was Christ." Luke's story is clearly marked by the 
characteristics of priestly fraud. 

In Matthew IX., 2-8, a miraculous cure of palsy is related. Christ said to 
the afflicted man : "'Arise, take up thy bed and go unto thy house;' and he 
arose and departed to his house." Mark says (11.12): "And immedwtely he 
arose, took up the bed and went forth, before them all." Luke (V, 25) says : 
"And immediately he arose up before them, and took up that whereon he lay, 
and departed to his own house, glorifying God" 

The miraculous cure of the issue of blood, as related by Matthew, (IX. 20) is 
considerably stretched by Mark, (V. 25). 

Matthew (XIV. 15-22), Luke (IX. 12), and John (VI. 11) tell of a miraculous 
feeding of live thousand persons; and in Matthew XV. 38, and Mark VIII. 9, it 
is said that four thousand persons were miraculously ted. These accounts are 
evidently confused reports of the same tradition or event. That the same event 
is referred to is clear, because the narratives agree with each other in the order 
of the speeches and events, and nearly of words; because, according to the 
latter story, the actors do not remember the first miracle, but ask — " Whence 
have we bread in the wilderness to satisfy so great a multitude ?" and Jesus, in 
his answer, shows a like unconsciousness of any similar occurrence, because the 
event occurred near the sea of Galilee in each case ; and because, after each 
miracle, Jesus sends the multitude away, and passes over the sea. Matthew 
evidently thought that there were two separate miracles, (XVI. 9, 10) ; while, 
according to John, (VI. 26, 30-32), both Jesus and the people speak as though 
there had been no miracle. 

Matthew (VIII. 5), and Luke (VII. 1-10), relate the circumstances of a 
miraculous cure of a Centurion's servant. John relates a similar cure of the 



62 MIRACLES. [SEC. XXIV. 

son of a nobleman or ruler. All say the event happened at Capernaum soon 
after the sermon on the mount, and relate the miracle in similar terms, and 
ascribe nearly the same words to Jesus. Everything goes to show that the 
Evangelists referred to the same event or report. Matthew describes the sick 
person in Greek as a pais or boy. Luke supposed the boy to be a servant, and 
called him doulos, a servant : and John supposed the boy to be a son, and called 
bim vios, a son. 

Mark (X. 46-52) relates the miraculous and immediate cure of a blind man by 
Jesus, while the latter was going from Jericho. Luke (XVIII. 35) tells of a 
cure of a blind man while Jesus was going to Jericho. John (IX. 6-11) adds, 
that the miracle was not immediate, and that the man did not see till he had 
gone to the pool of Siloam. Matthew has two miraculous cures of two blind, 
men, (IX. 27, XX. 30), in the place of Mark's one cure of one blind man. The 
expressions and incidents are so similar that they must have been confused 
accounts of the same affair. 

Matthew tells (XVII. IS) of the miraculous and immediate cure of a lunatic; 
but Mark (IX. 25) says the cure was not immediate. 

The barren fig tree, cursed by Christ, withered immediately according to 
Matthew, (XXI. 19), but Mark says it was found withered the next day. 

Luke (XXII. 51) says thatMalchus' ear. cut off by Peter, was healed forthwith; 
but Matthew, (XXVI. 51), Mark (XIV. 47) and John (XVIII. 10) make no men- 
tion of the healing. 

The assertion made by Luke, (XXII. 43), that an angel appeared in the gar- 
den to strengthen Jesus (the God) in preparation for the crucifixion, is not cor- 
roborated by Matthew, (XXVI. 36), Mark (XIV. 86), or John (XVIII. 1). 

John says there was a voice from Heaven (XII. 28, 29), but some thought it 
was thunder. 

Matthew (IX. 18), Mark (V. 22), and Luke (VIII. 41), record the recall of 
Jairus' daughter to life. These three authors admit that they were not present, 
but say that John was there. He, however, says nothing about it in his 
evangel. 

The raising of the widow's son at Nain, told by Luke (VII. 11-15), is not 
mentioned by the other evangelists. 

The miracle of recalling the dead Lazarus to life, as narrated by John XL 43, 
was the most splendid of all the miracles. The writer does not profess to have 
been preseut on the occasion, and the narrative is indirectly contradicted by 
Matthew (XX. 29-XXI. 1), and Mark (X. 46-XI. 1), and Luke (XIX. 1-37). 
Hennell says: "Neither Matthew, Mark nor Luke appear to have had any 
knowledge of the affair; for they are not only silent concerning it, but their 
accounts do not easily admit of its introduction. John puts the supper at 



SEC. XXI V.] RESURRECTION OF LAZARUS. 63 

which Lazarus sat after his resurrection, one day before the public entry into 
Jerusalem- But Matthew, as well as Mark and Luke, makes it appear that 
Jesus made his entry into Jerusalem on coming direct from Jericho, a distance 
of about tw-enty miles; and that after this he took up his abode at Bethany. 
John's story of Lazarus requires, therefore, another previous abode at Bethany, 
which breaks in violently upon the order of events in Matthew, whose narrative 
seems to exclude the possibility of Jesus having already resided for some time 
so near to Jerusalem as fifteen furlongs. (See Mat. XIX. 1 ; XX. 18, 29; XXI. 1). 
The supper at Bethany also is related by Matthew long after the entrance, 
although he is not precise as to the date, (XXVI. 6). This supper is proved to 
be the same one at which John says Lazarus was present, by the alabaster box 
of ointment, and the speech of Judas for the poor. Yet Matthew and Mark 
seem quite ignorant of that which John says attracted the Jews — the presence 
of the revived Lazarus. The story of Lazarus seems again to be forced upon 
the attention of the first three Evangelists, when they relate the entrance of 
Jesus into Jerusalem, and the conduct of the multitude ; for John says that the 
people bare record of his having raised Lazarus. But here, also, they make not 
the slightest allusion to it. It is impossible to conceive any plausible reason 
for this concealment, when the same three Evangelists appear so willing to re- 
late all the miracles they were acquainted with, and actually relate some that 
were said to be done in secret. That they had all forgotten this miracle so 
completely, that it did not once occur to them whilst relating the connected 
circumstances, cannot be imagined ; and if any miracle deserved a preference 
in the eyes of narrators disposed to do honor to Christ, or even to give a faithful 
account of him, it was this. The Acts and the Epistles no where allude to this 
story, although it would have afforded Paul a very good instance of the resur- 
rection of the body, (1 Cor. XV. 35). The first mention, therefore, of the most 
public and decisive of the miracles, appears in a writing published at Epesus, 
sixty years afterwards — a distance both of time and place, which rendered it 
easy to publish fictitious statements without fear of contradiction." 

The transfiguration of Christ is mentioned by Matthew (XVII. 2.), Mark 
(IX. 2.), and Luke (IX. 28.), but neither one of these was present, while John, 
who is reported to have been present, says nothing of it. The three Evan- 
gelists, who speak of the trausfiguration, say that Jesus cautioned those pre- 
sent to keep the event a secret. 

Matthew's story (XXVII. 63,) of the guard at Christ's tomb bears the mark 
of fiction. The Pharisees are made to say:— "We remember that deceiver 
said while he was yet alive, after three days I will rise again." From John 
XX. 9, it appears that Jesus never said so even to his disciples. The guard 
story is not alluded to in any other portion of the New Testament. The disci- 



64 MIRACLES. [SEC. XXIV. 

pies dicl not expect a resurrection (Luke XXIV. 11. Mark XVI. 11. John 
XX. 29. Matthew XXVIII. 17.), and how should the Pharisees? 

The Apostles are said to have been gifted miraculous!} 7 with the power of 
speaking various languages, (Mark XVI. 17. 1 Cor. V. 23, XII. 10). Hennell 
says: " There is no evidence that the Apostles had acquired supernaturally tha 
use of other languages. That generally spoken throughout the eastern pro- 
vinces of the Roman Empire was the Greek; and owing to the continual inter- 
course with Roman tax-gatherers and soldiers, even the lower classes of Jews 
dwelling in towns could not but acquire some rtide knowledge of it. Campbell 
acknowledges that the Greek of the New Testament is a * barbarous idiom.' 
4 It any one contends/ says Erasmus, 'that the Apostles were inspired by 
God, with the knowledge of all tongues, and that this gift was perpetual in 
them, since everything which is performed b} r a divine power is more perfect, 
according St. Chrysoston, than what is performed either in the ordinary course 
of nature, or by the pains of man, how comes it to pass that the language of 
the Apostles is not only rough and unpolished, but imperfect: also confused 
and sometimes even plainly solecising and absurd; for we cannot possibly deny 
what the fact itself declares to be true.' " 

Such are the records of the miracles which deserve a special notice, and not 
one is sustained by clear and unexceptionable evidence. Hennell objects to the 
miracles ascribed to Christ: — " That he puts himself on a level with Jewish 
exorcists, (Mat. XII. 27) ; that hrecognised the attempts of others as real miracles, 
(Mark IX. 38, 39,) : that he admits there is more difficulty in some miracles 
than in others (XVII. 2,) ; that he required faith beforehand, (Mat. IX. 27, 2. 
Mark VI. 5,) ; that his answers were of such a nature as to dismiss applicants 
without injury to his credit, whatever might be the result, (Mat. VII. 13. IX 
29. XV. 23, 28. • Mark X. 52. John IX. 7). In Matthew and Mark the more 
decided miracles — such as raising the dead, curing the blind, &c. f are adnrtted 
to have been done in secret, (Mat. VIII. 4. IX. 30. Mark V. 43. VII. 36.) 
The miracles were chiefly performed among the country people of Galilee, 
according to Matthew and Mark. Jesus refused to perform miracles before the 
Pharisees or learned persons, (Mat XVI. 1-4. Mark VIII. 2. John II. 18* 
VI. 30.) In most of the narratives the saying of Jesus and the incident leading 
to it, form the most conspicuous part, and the accompanying miracle is but a 
brief echo; and none of those on whom the miracles were said to be performed 
come forward themselves to attest them in the subsequent part of the history, or 
play any conspicuous part in the affairs of the Church. Besides these things 
many of the witnesses of Christ's miracles did not believe in him, as appears 
from the record, (Mat. XL 20. Mark VI. 52, John VII. 5, XI. 45, 46, XII. 37). 

It has already been seen that there is no evidence that any portion of the 



SEC. XXIV. j HUME ON MIRACLES. 65 

New Testament was published at Jerusalem during the generation in which the 
miracles of Christ are reported to have been done. Neither is there any satis- 
factory proof that the authors of the New Testament witnessed the miracles; 
and thus it may be said that two absolutely essential links in the chain of evi- 
dence necessary to make a miracle credible, are wanting. But if it were granted, 
that all four of the Evangelists had personally witnessed the miracles, and had 
published their evangels on the ground forthwith, the question would arise, is 
the testimony of four men, not known to us personally, sufficient to prove a 
miracle? Would the testimony of four priests, that they had seen a marble 
statue of the Virgin weep watery tears and roll its eyes in agony, carry con- 
viction to the minds of ordinary men V Certainly not, and yet why should 
more faith, be yielded to the assertions of priests of old than to those of the pre- 
sent day? Hume in his " Essay on Miracles," after explaining the evidence 
that should be required to prove a miracle, continues: — "T am the better 
pleased with the method of reasoning here delivered, as I think it may serve to 
confound those dangerous friends or disguised enemies to the Christian religion, 
who have undertaken to defend it by the principles of human reason; our most 
holy religion is founded on faith and not on human reason; and it is a sure 
method of exposing it, to put it to such a trial as it is by no means fitted to en- 
dure. To make this more evident, l^t us examine those miracles related in 
Scripture; and not to lose ourselves in too wide a field, let us confine our- 
selves to such as we find in the Pentateuch, which we shall examine according 
to the principles of these pretended Christians, not as the word or testimony of 
God himself, but as the production of a mere human writer and historian. 
Here then we are first to consider a book presented to us by a barbarous and 
ignorant people, written in an age when they were still more barbarous, and in 
all probability long after the facts which it relates, corroborated by no con- 
curring testimony, and resembling those fabulous accounts, which. eYery nation 
gives of its origin. Upon reading this book we find it full of prodigies and 
miracles. It gives an account of a state of the world and of human nature 
entirely different from the present, of our fall from that state, of the age of 
man extending to near a thousand years, of the destruction of the world by a 
deluge, of the arbitrary choice of one people as the favorites of Heaven — and 
that people the countrymen of the author — and of their deliverance from bon- 
dage by prodigies the most astonishing imaginable. I desire any one to lay 
his hand upon his heart, and after a serious consideration, declare whether he 
thinks that the falsehood of such a book, supported by such testimonj', would 
be more extraordinary and miraculous than all the miracles it relates; which is 
however necessary to make it be received according to the measures of proba- 
bility. What we have said of miracles may be applied without any variation to 
3 



66 HlfiAGLES. XXTT- 

prophecies ; and indeed all prophecies are real miracles, and as such only can be 
admitted as proof of any revelation. If it did not exceed the capacity «;f human 
nature to foretell huni s, it would he absurd to em; 

argument for a divine mission or ant] upon the 

ie, we may conclude that the Christian religion was not only at first 

uded with miracles, but even at this da ..son- 

able person without one." 

Pel :- miracles of the New Testament; and in 

that : he sake of consis:. houldalso it miracles are 

done now-a-days. It is said that the testimony of miracles ws ay to 

:ianity, but that bein_: 
The Bible speaks of miracles and divinely ins made 

every day, or at least frequently, during the whole time covered by the record, 
more than fifteen hundred years — during a great portion of which time the 
faith of the people in the divine origin of the Church was not more firm than at 
present. The si clency of the present age is evident to all intelligent 

men; the Bible is losing ground every day; and why should not miracles be 
done to maintain, as well as to build up a creed '? Why were there no miracles 
done in Europe during the sion, when thirty millions of enlight- 

ened men deserted the Christian Church, and desecrated the tern; 

] with heathen mockeries '? But when was Christian - It 

gradually extended from the crucifixion of Chris: till the beginning of the 
century, when it began to lose ground. About tb , should be con- 

sidered (he date of its establishment, and yet no enlightened person will consent 
to believe that the power of working mirac until the beginning of the 

eighteenth century. There is no place to draw tae line short of 1700 A. D. 
But the New Testament does not authorise any line to be drawn. Jesus is re- 
presented to have said, (Mark XVI. 17, 18) : — " These signs shall follow them 
that believe : in my name shall they cast out devils : they shall speak with new 
I hey shall take up serpents: and if they drink any deadly thing it 
shall not hurt them : they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.'' 
The meaning of this sentence is plain— the miraculous power was to follow the 

ifiil forever: and there is nothing in the New Testament to contradict 

interpretation. Stephen, Philip, and Paul, who were neither apostles nor disciples 

of Christ, perfjrmed miracles, Act? VI. 3, 8. VII. 8. XIII. li. XIV. 5. XIX. 

Nearly every one ol the Celebrated fathers of the Christian Church pre- 

:ith century recorded or credited a number of miracles. Among 

. fathers who did so record or credit miracles, were Papias, Justin Martvr, 
Irenasus, Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, Tertullian, Minucius Felix, OrigeD, 
Cyprian, Arnobius, Lactantius, Basil, Chrysostom, Gregory of Xyssa, Diony- 



5-EC. XXIV.] MIRACLES OF THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 6? 

sius, bishop of Alexandria, Athenagoras, Eusebius, Augustine, Hesperius, 
Athanasius, Epiphanius and Theodoret. All of these persons have been honored 
with the title of Saint by the Catholic Church, among the members of which 
during their time, they had no superiors in intelligence or ability ; and most 
-ol them left writings of importance to show that the gospel is now preserved 
as it was in their time. 1 hese numerous authors, whose works have far better 
evidences for their authenticity than there are for the reputed evangels of 
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, corroborate ea-ch other in regard to the power 
of the Church to perform miracles, and in regard to the frequency of miracles; 
and if these two points be well established, there can be little difficulty about 
accepting particular miracles. But when the nature of the miracles witnessed 
by these saints is explained, our faith in both saints and miracles must become 
faint. Chrysostom, Basil, Jerome, and Augustine, four of the greatest men of 
the primitive Church, exalt the miraculous power of relics, and it was by these 
saiuts as a class, that monkery, the worship of relics, the invocation of saints, 
prayers for the dead, image worship, the sacraments, the sign of the cross, and 
the use of consecrated oil were introduced. Gibbon, in the " Decline and 
Fall," * has occasion to say: — "The grave and learned Augustine, whose un- 
derstanding scarcely admits the excuse of credulity, has attested the innume- 
rable prodigies which were performed in Africa by the relics of St. Stephen ; and 
this marvellous narrative is inserted in the elaborate work of the City of God, 
which the bishop of Hippo designed as a solid and immortal proof of the truth 
of Christianity. Augustine solemnly declares that he has selected those mi- 
racles only, which were publicly certified by persons who were either the objects 
or the spectators of the power of the martyr. * * * The bishop enumerates 
above seventy miracles, of which three were resurrections from the dead in two 
years, and within the limits of his own diocese. * * * The knowledge of 
foreign languages was frequently communicated to the contemporaries of 
Irenseus, though Irenseus himself was left to struggle with the difficulties of a 
barbarous dialect, whilst he preached the gospel to the natives of Gaul. * * 

* The miraculous cure of diseases of the most inveterate or even of preter- 
natural kind, can no longer occasion any surprise, when we recollect that in the 
days of Irena3us, about the end of the second century, the resurrection of the 
dead was very far from being considered an uncommon event : that the miracle 
was frequently performed on necessary occasions, by great fasting and th- at 
joint supplication of the church of the place, and that the persons thus restor ired 
to their prayers had lived afterwards among them many years." all 

What may be proved by a miracle ? A miracle may prove that the doer had 
supernatural power to do the miraculous act. If a man should do many mi- 

* Chap. XXVIII 



68 MIRACLES. [SEC. XXIV. 

racles, it might be inferred that he possessed and would continue to possess the 
supernatural power of working such miracles as he had wrought. But the 
possession of that supernatural power would not suffice to prove the possession 
of all supernatural powers, or of any other superhuman powers. It would not 
prove him to be sharper sighted, wiser, or more learned than other men. It 
would not prove that everything he should say would be true. There is no 
necessary connection between a man's truthfulness and power : and this doc- 
trine is repeatedly recognised in the Bible, where it is said that bad men or 
idolators have wrought miracles. Then it follows that miracles cannot prove 
the Bible to be true. Morell says : — " Miracles had nothing immediately to do 
with inspiration ; miraculous powers on the one side are no positive proof of 
their agent being inspired: thus inspiration on the one side is admitted to 
exist, where no miraculous powers have been granted. * * * It appears 
that the one gift was not necessarily connected with the other ; that miracles 
while they evinced a divine commission did not prove the infallibility of the 
agent as a teacher ; that they were in fact separate arrangements of Providence, 
each having its own purpose to perform, and each requiring a special capacity 
to perform them. The one demanded an extraordinary physical power — the 
other a mental and moral enlightenment: and so little are those two qualities 
regarded in the Bible, as vouchers for each other, that the former is often des- 
cribed as being exercised by evil men, and even by Satan himself." If mira- 
culous evidence cannot prove the Bible to be true, it follows that any appeal to 
such evidence is discreditable, and unworthy of an upright and dignified source, 
not to speak of an immediate divine one. 



PKOPHECIES. 



XXV. The Bible is said to contain many prophecies, — predictions of events 
Undiseoverable to human foresight when the predictions were made, — and 
therefore proof that the prophets were possessed of superhuman knowledge ; 
that they were divinely inspired, and that their teachings as explained in the 
Bible were true. Before a prophecy be received as of divine origin, it should 
appear on examination that the prophecy, including the date of the promised 
fulfilment, was expressed in clear terms ; that it was made before the event 
foretold ; that the event foretold was not discoverable to human foresight ; and 
that the special prediction, as well as all others from the same source, was 
literally fulfilled. There have been pretended prophets in all ages, and in all 
countries, professing to be possessed of divine knowledge, and teaching very 
different religious doctrines; and their impostures were maintained by deliver- 
ing their oracles in ambiguous phrases, which could be interpreted either way 
to suit the event. Nearly five hundred years before Christ, the Athenians sent 
to the heathen oracle at Delphi, to learn how they could best resist the great 
invasion of the Persians, who were approaching. The oracle advised the Athe- 
nians to trust in wooden walls. This advice was not explicit, but the 
Athenians understood it to be a promise that they should succeed by relying 
upon their navy ; and the Greeks were all convinced, by the battle of Salamis, 
of what they never doubted before, that the oracle of Delphi was possessed of 
more than human foreknowledge. Grote relates the following instance of an- 
cient prophecy : — " Crcesus sent to inquire of the Oracle of Apollo at Delphi, 
whether he should undertake an expedition against Cyrus. The reply was that 
if he did, he would subvert a mighty empire. He sent again and enquired 
whether his empire would be durable. The reply was :— ' When a mule shall 
become king of the Medes then thou must run away. 7 Crcesus attacked Cyrus, 
was defeated, made a prisoner, and his kingdom was subjected to the Medes 
and the Persians. He accused the Oracle with falsehood, but the reply was 
that :— ' When the god told him he would subvert a mighty empire, it was his 



70 PROPHECIES. [SEC. XXV. 

duty to inquire which empire the god meant ? and if he neither understood the 
meaning nor chose to ask for information, he had himself to blame for the result. 
Besides, Croesus neglected the warning given to him about the acquisition of the 
Median kingdom by a mule. Cyrus was that mule — son of a Median mother, of 
royal breed, by a Persian father, at once of a different race and of lower position.' 
This triumphant justification extorted even from Crcesus himself, a full con- 
fession that the sin lay with him, and not with the god." One more example 
of a supposed divine prophecy, of which thousands could be produced. 
We quote now from Gibbon : — " In a very long discourse on the evidences of 
the divine authority of the gospel, which is still extant, Constantine [the Empe- 
ror who first made Christianity respectable and legal in Rome] dwells with 
peculiar complacency on the Sibylline verses and the fourth eclogue of Virgil. 
Forty years before the birth of Christ, the Mantuan bard, as if inspired by the 
celestial muse of Isaiah, had celebrated with all the pomp of oriental metaphor 
the return of the Virgin, the fall of the serpent, the approaching birth of a god- 
like child, the offspring of the great Jupiter, who should expiate the guilt of 
the human kind, and govern the peaceful universe with the virtues of his father : 
the rise and appearance of a heavenly race, a primitive nation throughout the 
world, and the gradual restoration of the innocence and felicity of the golden 
age. The poet was perhaps unconscious of the secret sense and object of these 
sublime predictions, which have been so unworthily applied to the infant son 
of a consul or a triumvir; but if a more splendid and indeed specious interpre- 
tation of the fourth eclogue contributed to the conversion of the first Christian 
Emperor, Virgil may deserve to be ranked among the most successful mis- 
sionaries of the gospel." Such are the records of an infinitely small portion of 
the fraud and credulity of former times : and when it is known that men have 
been frequently misled in a certain road, all subsequent passers-by should exer- 
cise an especial vigilance to avoid falling into the same error. 



ALLEGED PROPHECIES OF JESUS. 



XXVI. The Apostles believed that the strongest proof of Christ's divine mis- 
sion was contained in the fulfilment of a large number of prophecies, by his 
coming, (Luke XXIV. 25, 44 ; Acts III. 18 ; XVII. 2-11 ; II. 16 ; VII. 52 ■ VIII. 
35; X. 43; XIII. 27; XVIII. 28; XXVI, 22; XXVIII. 23 ; 1 Cor. XV. 3). 
Jesus appealed to the prophecies for proof of his mission, (John V. 39; Luke 
XXIV. 25-27). "The greatest proofs of Jesus Christ," says Pascal, "are the 
prophecies, and thus God foreordained ; for the fulfilment of the prophecies is 
a miracle subsisting from the beginning of the church to the end. * * * If one 
man alone had made a book predicting successfully the time and the manner of 
the coming of Jesus Christ, the evidence would have been infinite. But in the 
Bible there is much more. Here was a succession of men for four thousand 
years, who constantly, without variation, arise one after another, to predict the 
same event. The announcement is made by an entire people, which subsists 
for four thousand years to bear testimony to Him, and from that testimony they 
could not be turned by any threats or persecution." 

We will examine these wonderful prophecies, beginning with those upon 
which the great Pascal laid so much stress. 

Matthew says, (I. 23): "Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled, 
which was spoken of the Lord, by the prophet, saying, behold a virgin shall be 
with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, 
which being interpreted is God with us." The reference is undoubtedly to 
Isaiah VII. 14, "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: behold a 
virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter 
and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil and choose the 
good. For, before the child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, 
the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings." Isaiah evi- 
dently spoke of his own times and of his own child, (VIII. 3, 4). Such is the 
first of the boasted prophecies of Christ in the Jewish Scriptures, appealed to in 
the New Testament, and all the rest are no better. The allusions by the Evan- 
gelists to prophecies in tho Old Testament of the coming of Christ, are so 



72 ALLEGED PROPHECIES OF JESUS. [SKC. XXVl. 

numerous and so plainly erroueous, that they scarcely deserve to be considered 
separately. 

Matthew's second ieference (II, 6) to a Messianic prediction in the Hebrew 
Scriptures, speaks of a promised " ruler in Israel." The alleged prophecy was 
in Micah, (V. 2), but the latter author spoke of a ruler to deliver " us from the 
Assyrians." Christ was neither a ruler in Israel nor a conqueror of the Assy" 
rians. 

Matthew (II. 15) finds his third big trump in Hosea (XL 1), who says, " When 
Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." It 
might be a question whether the writer of Matthew could possibly have claimed 
this as a prophecy of Christ, under the delusions of superstitious ignorance, free 
from any consciousness or suspicion of fraud. Hosea is plainly speaking of the 
Jewish nation alone. Strauss says : " Xot a little courage was necessary to 
apply the first part of that sentence to the Jews under Moses, and the latter part 
to Jesus, but Matthew did it." 

Matthew (II. 17), says that Jeremiah (XXXI. 15) in speaking of " Rachel 
weeping for her children," foretold the weeping of the women of Judea for their 
children massacred by Herod. The Hebrew priest was really writing of the 
sorrows of his people in the Babylonian captivity. Everything goes to show 
that the pretended prophecy was an allusion to the past. 

Matthew says (II. 23) that Christ was a Xazarene, in accordance with pro- 
phecy. There is no parallel passage in the Bible. In Judges XIII. 7, it is said 
that Samson " shall be a Nazarite to God,' 7 but there is no perceptible connexion 
between Christ and Samson, so far as such a prophecy is concerned. 

Matthew (III. 2) says : " For this [John the Baptist] is he that was spoken of 
by the prophet Esaias, saying, "The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Pre- 
pare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." This passage is found 
in Isaiah (XL. 3), but there is nothing to mark the sentence as peculiarly appli- 
cable to any one person, and it might as well be applied to any pretended fore- 
runner of a pretended Messiah, as to John the Baptist. The writer of Isaiah in 
writing the verse, meant evidently to " give a joyful exhortation to the Jews on 
their return from captivity." 

There is a reference in Matthew IY. 13 to Isaiah IX. 1 as prophetic, but 
the Hebrew evidently referred to the past time of Josiah. Compare Isa. Y1II. 
19— IX. 7, with 2 K. XXIII. 24, 25. 

Matthew says, (VIII. 16, 17), " that it might be fulfilled which was spoken 
by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sick- 
ness." Isaiah says, (LIII. 4) : "Hereby he hath borne our griefs and carried 
our sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted." 
Everything alludes to something in the past— nothing to fix the application 



SEC. XXVI.] MATTHEW AND ISAIAH. 73 

upon a person in the future; nothing to distinguish whether the bearer of the 
sorrows was or was to be, a king, a savior, a prophet, or a nation itself. Was 
Jesus " smitten of God," afflicted by himself? 

Matthew (XII. 13) quotes Isaiah (XLII. 1): " Behold my servant, whom I 
have chosen : my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my 
spirit upon him, and he shall show judgment to the Gentiles," &c. The servant 
in this case could not well be a person of the Godhead, while it might be applied 
very properly to the Jewish people as a body. See Isa. XLI. 8 ; XLII. 19, 25; 
XLIII, 1. 

The Evangelist (Mat. XIII. 14) applies to his own time a saying evidently 
written by Isaiah (VI. 9), with reference to the time preceding the captivity. 
See VI. 1-11. 

A saying of Isaiah (XXIX. 13) that the devotion of the Jews to their religion 
was only outward, intended to refer to ancient time, is tortured (Mat. XV. 7) into 
a prophecy. There is nothing to show a prediction peculiarly applicable to 
Christ or his times, while in chapter XXX. of Isaiah the people are reproved for 
seeking assistance from Egypt. 

Mat. XXI. 4, "All this [the entry into Jerusalem] was done that it might be 
fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, Tell ye the daughter of 
Sion, behold thy king cometh unto thee, meek and sitting upon an ass, and a 
colt, the foal of an ass." The alleged prophecy is found in Zechariah (IX. 9), 
and refers to Zerubbabel. See Zech. III. 8, 9— IV. 6-10— VI. 11-13. 

Matthew (XXVI. 31) says : "Then saitfa Jesus unto them, all ye shall be 
offended because of me this night, for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, 
and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad." The alleged prophecy is 
found in Zechariah XIII. 7: "Awake, sword, against my shepherd, and 
against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of Hosts; smite the shepherd, 
and the sheep shall be scattered ; and I will turn mine hand upon the little 
ones." The writer refers to the miseries of the captivity, as appears very 
plainly from the context, more particularly the two verses following those 
quoted. The phrase, "the man that is my fellow," means the man that resides 
in Jerusalem, the fellow citizen of Jehovah. 

"All this [the arrest of JesusJ was done," says Matthew, (XXVI. 56), " that 
the Scriptures of the prophets should be fulfilled." There is no such prophecy 
in the Jewish Scriptures. 

Matthew says, (XXVII. 9), that the thirty pieces of silver paid for the treachery 
of Judas, and the potters' field were foretold by Jeremiah. The only correspond- 
ing passage is in Zechariah, (XI. 12, 13), but ihere is nothing to give the passage 
a prophetic character, or to make it applicable to Christ. Besides the story of 
the thirty pieces of silver and the potters' field rests entirely in the faith of Mat- 
thew, who finds in them a fulfilment of prophecy. 



74 ALLEGED PROPHECIES OF JESUS. | SEC. XXVI. 

Such are the prophecies so confidently appealed to by Matthew, and not one 
of them has a clearly prophetic character, or can be restricted in its meaning to 
Christ, or was understood among the Jews to have the meaning given to it 
among the Christians. The prophecies appealed to by the other Evangelists 
are similar in character, and they do not deserve a lengthy consideration. If, 
however, any one be curious to see the passages in Mark, Luke, John and the 
Acts referring to prophecies in the Old Testament, he can find them by the 
following references: 

Compare Mark I. 2, with Malachi III., IV. 

" Mark XV. 28, with Isaiah LIII. 12, XIII. 

Luke I. 69, II. 32, with Isaiah XLII. 6, XLIX. 6, XIII. 

" Luke IV. 17, 18, with Isaiah XLI. 1, 4. 

" Luke VII. 27, with Malachi III. 1. 

" Luke XXIV. 27, 44, John I. 45, with Deut, XVIII. 15, Hosea VI. 1, 2. 

" John VII. 41, with Micah V. 2, 6. 

John XII. 37, with Isaiah LIII, 2 Ch. XXXVI. 20, 21. 

" John XIX. 24, 28, 29, with Ps. XXII. 16, 18, LXIX. 21. 

" John XIX. 33-36, with Ex. XII. 46. 

" John XIX. 37, with Zech. XII. 10. 

" John XX. 10. No parallel passage. 

" Acts I. 16, 20, with Ps. LXIX, CIX. 

" Acts II. 16, with latter part of Joel. 

" Acts II. 25, with Ps. XVI., CXXXII. 11. 

" Acts III. 24, 25. No parallel passage. 

Acts IV. 25, with Ps. II., LXXXIX. 20, 27. 

" Acts VIII. with Is. LIII. 

il Acts X. 43. No parallel passage. 

" Acts XIII. 27, with Dan. IX. 26. 

« Acts XIII. 32, with Ps. IL, LXXXIX. 

" Acts XV. 15, with Amos IX. 11, 12. 
The errors of the New Testament writers in the allusions to these passages as 
prophecies, are so evident, that the Church has been sorely troubled to get over 
them. About a century ago, Whiston, an ardent believer, and the successor of 
Sir Isaac Newton in his mathematical professorship, published a book to prove 
that the Jews, during the early ages of the Christian Church, had fraudulently 
altered the passages of the Old Testament referred to as prophecies of Christ, 
by the Evangelists. The skeptics replied, that if such were the fact, the Old 
Testament was not reliable on any point. Whipton's theory was widely received 
as correct, until a comparison of all the ancient copies of the Jewish Scriptures 
showed them to be all alike in the alleged predictions. Another theory was 



SEC. XXVI.] WHISTON ? S THEORY. 75 

that the Old Testament passages referred to had two meanings, one historical 
and the other prophetic. Palfrey, (Ev. Ch. Lee. XYIII), who has a great deal 
to say on this question, admits, (and the same thing- has been admitted by some 
of the ablest Christian authors): " The New Testament writers did sometimes 
interpret the Old Testament erroneously." He also says: " The theory of a 
double sense, less esteemed now than formerly in any quarter, appears to me to 
be justly liable to the charge of violating all the principles of language, and of 
being in fact the theory of no definite sense whatsoever." 



PROPHECIES OF A ROYAL MESSIAH. 



XXVII. It is not to be denied that many of the Old Testament writers 
foretold the coming of a Messiah, an anointed person, who was to be not a 
religious teacher or reformer, but a king destined to relieve the Jews from 
captivity and restore the nation to its former prosperity and greatness. Accord- 
ingly, the Messiah was not to come from the stock of Levi — the family of priests 
who were to serve the Jews as divine intercessors forever, and were to have 
Jehovah for their exclusive inheritance — but from the stock of David, the royal 
family, who had furnished all the kings of Judah subsequent to the time of 
Saul, and to whom the throne of Judea had been promised as an eternal posses- 
sion. The Evangelists do not refer to, or lay any stress upon, the true prophe- 
cies of the Messiah; (Is. II. 2-4; Jer. XXXI. 31-40; Ezek. XI. 19-29'; XXXVI. 
26-3S; Micah. IV. 1-10; Haggai, II. 6-9; Zech. XII. 10-XIV. 19 ; Mai. III. 
1). The Evangelists do lay particular stress upon the fact that the Messiah 
was to be a descendant of David, and they attempt to show that Jesus was a 
descendant from their great king; but their showing fails completely in its 
purpose. If we accept the New Testament as true, there is uot the slightest 
proof that Jesus had a particle of the blood of David in his veins. Matthew 
and Luke give each a genealogy to show the descent of Jesus, but these gene- 
alogies are irreconcilable with each other, and, if true, they prove only that 
Joseph — who was in nowise related by blood to Jesus — was the descendant of 
David. Matthew begins at Abraham, comes down through David, and says 



16 PROPHECIES OF A ROYAL MESSIAH, |sEC. XXVII, 

"Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary," (L. 16). Luke begins at Jesus, sup- 
posed to be "the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli," through whom the 
genealogy, with names almost entirely different from those given by Matthew, 
is carried up to David, and thence to Adam. But it is asserted that Matthew 
means to say that Heli was the father,, not of Joseph, but of Mary. This theory 
might avoid the difficulty of the inconsistencies, as well as account for the 
Davidical blood of Jesus, but unfortunately there is no proof to support the 
theory. The Evangelists could not have used plainer language, than they have 
used, in a straightforward narrative to assert the descent of Joseph from David. 
Matthew tells us (I. 20) that an angel appeared to Joseph and said, " thou son 
of David," and Luke says (I. 27) that Jesus was born of "a virgin espoused to 
a man whose name was Joseph, of tlie house of David" The blood of Joseph, 
about which so much is said, has nothing to do with the matter, if Jesus was 
not his natural son ; while there is not a word in the New Testament, at least 
not one now known to the writer, to show that Mary was of the house of David. 
It has been thought by many free-thinkers that Jesus never laid claim to 
divinity ; he certainly does not make any such claim expressly or by necessary 
implication in the words ascribed to him by the Evangelists ; and the inconsis- 
tency about his Davidical descent just referred to, may be explained by suppos- 
ing that the gospels were written by persons who believed Jesus to be a man, 
and were subsequently corrupted to make him a God. 



PROPHECIES OP ISAIAH. 



XXVIII. The fifty-third chapter of Isaiah is generally looked upon by the 
Christian church, and has been declared by Paley, to contain the clearest and 
strongest prophetic passages in the Old Testament, evidently foretelling the 
advent, character and fate of Jesus. Before and after this chapter the Hebrew 
priest speaks of Jacob or Israel, and it is reasonable to suppose, if the context 
will admit the supposition, that his subject is the same in all these chapters, 
and that he would not change from history to prophecy and from prophecy to 
history, without some clear intimation. The first verse cf chapter fifty-two 



SEC. XXVIII.] JACOB THE LORD ? S SERVANT. 17 

begins by speaking of the " servant" of the Lord, interpreted to mean Jesus, 
who was no servant, if he was a God. The Septuagint translation, made 270 B. 
C, differs slightly from the Hebrew version, and says, " Jacob is my servant," 
thus showing very plainly that the ancient Jews saw no prophecy of a Messiah 
in that passage. Chapter fifty-second goes on to describe the servant as mute, 
humble and firm in his faith, and so the Israelites were during their captivity. 
In verse nineteenth the servant is described as " blind," which Jesus was not. 
In verse twentieth he is said to see without observing, and to open his ears 
without hearing; and these terms cannot be applied to Christ. In verse 
twenty-second the servant is said to be " robbed and spoiled." In chapter fifty- 
third the writer describes him in captivity like a plant on a barren soil, 
" despised," "rejected," "smitten of God," "wounded. for our [the Jews'] 
transgressions," " silent in his affliction, cut off from the land of the living, 
[Judea] buried with the wicked, [in Babylon] whom it pleased the Lord to 
bruise, but who should see his seed, and whose days should be prolonged 
There is, in fact, in the whole chapter not a verse which may not be applied a 
appropriately to the Jewish nation as to Jesus. 



PROPHECIES OF DANIEL. 



XXIX. The eighth chapter of Daniel is reputed to contain some of the most 
remarkable prophecies in the Bible. Hennell says, it gives "an account of a 
vision of a ram with two horns, which was smitten by a he-goat having a 
notable horn between his eyes, which horn being broken, four other notable 
horns came up toward the four winds of heaven. The chapter itself informs us 
that by this was meant the conquest of the kings or kingdoms of Media and 
Persia, by the king of Grecia; the first great horn being the first king, viz.: 
Alexander the Great, and tbe Tour notable horns after him, four kingdoms, 
which shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power, i. e., plainly the 
four Macedonian monarchies of Thrace, Macedon, Syria, and Egypt. So far 
this vision is clear, and commentators agree. But Daniel sees coming out of 



T8 PROPHECIES OP DANIEL. [SEC. XXTX. 

the four notable horns a little horn, which plays a very conspicuous part, and 
to determine who the little horn is, forms the great problem of the book of 
Daniel. Josephus understood it to mean Antiochus Epiphanes ; according to- 
Jerome it was Antiochus as a type of Anti-Christ. Sir Isaac Newton thought 
it meant the Romans. Bishop Newton thought it meant first the Romans and 
afterwards the popes." Many biblical critics believe that the book of Daniel 
was written after the time of Alexander* 



KEVELATIONS. 



XXX. The only book in the Bible making pretensions to be purely pro- 
phetic, is Revelations, and it is the most obscure portion of the Scripture. No- 
interpretation has ever been offered that could find acceptation among any 
large portion of the Christian church. Nearly every prominent commentator 
on the Bible has had his own theory of the meaning of the Apocalypse, and 
these theories have been in many cases most inconsistent with each other* 
Alexander says that the book is " deeply mysterious," — that is to say, nobody 
knows what it means. Milman candidly confesses "it is to be feared that a 
history of the interpretation of the Apocalypse would not give a very favorable- 
view either of the wisdom or of the charity of the successive ages of Chris- 
tianity." Sir Isaac Newton, a very devout Christian, acknowledges that there 
are no true prophecies in the Bible, when he says, ""God gave these [Revela- 
tions] and the piophecies of the Old Testament, not to satisfy men's curiosity 
by enabling them to foreknow things, but that after they were fulfilled they 
might be interpreted by the event; and Kis prescience, not that of the inter- 
preter, be then manifested thereby to the world*" 



FALSE PROPHECIES. 



XXXI. There are many false prophecies in the Bible ; and that fact, once 
established, would suffice to destroy all faith in the successful predictions, if 
there were any. We shall give the principal of the false biblical prophecies 
within as small a compass as possible. 

Jehovah repeatedly promised that the family of David should possess the 
throne of Judea forever. See 1 K. II. 33; VIII. 25 ; 1 Ch. XVII. 12-14, 23 ; 
XXVIII. 4; 2 Ch. VI. 16; Ps. LXXXIX. 4, 29, 36 ; CXXXII. 12, 

The prophet says in 1 Ch. XVII. 12, "he [Solomon] shall build me an house 
and I will establish his throne forever." " I will settle him in mine house, and 
in my kingdom forever; and his throne shall be established forever more." 
Solomon, in his prayer at the dedication of the temple, (1 K. VIII. 25) said, 
'* Therefore now, Lord God of Israel, keep with thy servant David my father 
that thou promisedst him, saying there shall not fail thee a man in my sight to 
sit on the throne of Israel." David said on a previous occasion, (1 Ch. 
XXVIII. 4) " Howbeit the Lord G-od of Israel chose me before all the house ot 
my father to be king over Israel forever." Christian writers claim that these 
passages were intended to foretell only the everlasting dominion of Christ, the 
descendant of David, the religious reformer, the usurper of the place of the 
Levites. Such an interpretation ma}^ be necessary m those who pretend to 
believe that the Bible is the word of God, but it unfortunately is not supported 
by the letter or spirit of the Old Testament, Besides, where was the throne of 
David for five centuries before Christ? And where will be the dominion of 
Christ in a century from this time ? Probably not in any enlightened country. 

Jehovah and Canaan should be Israel's forever. Moses represents his deity 
as saying to Abram, " I will give to thee and to thy seed after thee the land 
wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan for an everlasting posses- 
sion, and I will be their God." Gen. XVII. 8 ; XIII. 15 ; Ps. CV. 

Jerusalem should be the seat of the Lord forever. 2 Ch. XXXIII. 4, 7 ; Pa. 
CXXXII. 4. 

The Leviies should minister to the Lord forever. 1 Ch. XV. 2. 



80 FALSE PKOPHECIES. [SEC. XXXI. 

The Israelites should dwell in Jerusalem forever. 1 Ch. XXIII. 25. 

Judah should possess Hebron forever. Josh. XIV. 9. 

Solomon's temple should be holy forever. 1 K. IX. 3; 2 Ch. VII. 16; 

xxxiii. r. 

All nations should be afraid of Israel. Deut. XXVIII. 10. 

Israel should be high above all nations in name and in praise and in honor. 
Deut. XXVI. 19. 

No king after Solomon should have such wealth and honor as he had.* 2 Ch. 
I. 12.- 

Judah and Israel should u;.ite. Ezek. XXXVII. 22. 

The Israelites should be as numerous as the dust of the earth. Gen. XIII. 16. 

The Levites should be perfect. Deut, XVIII. 13. 

Nineveh should be immediately destroyed. Jonah III. 4, 10. 

Rome should be totally destroyed. Rev. XVIII. 22. 

Damascus should be a city no more, but should be reduced to a " ruinous 
heap." Is. XVII. 1. 

Egypt should be conquered by Nebuchadnezzar. Jer. XLIII. 11 ; Ezek. 
XXIX. 19; XXX. 12; XXXII. 11, 12. 

" Xo foot of man shall pass through it, [Egypt] nor foot of beast shall pass 
through it, neither shall it be inhabited for forty years." Ezek. XXIX. 11. 

Jeremiah cursed king Jehoiakim and foretold that his dead body should be 
cast out to the dogs, and that he should have none to sit on the throne of 
David. Jer. XXII. 18, 19; XXXVI. 30. Jehoiakim, after death, " slept with 
his fathers, and Jehoiachin, his son, reigned in his stead." 2 K. XXIV. 6. 

Jeroboam should die by the sword. Amos VII. 11. Compare with 2 K. 
XIV. 29. 

Tyre should be destroyed within seventy years. Is. XXIII. 11, 17. That 
city was large and prosperous for more than 300 years after the alleged date of 
Isaiah's book. 

Mount Seir shall be perpetual desolation. Ezek. XXXV. 9. 

Jehovah said, " I will wipe Jerusalem as a man wipeth a dish, he wipeth it 
and turrieth it upside down." 2 K. XXI. 13. 

Theie should " no more be a prince of Egypt," and the idols of the Egyptians 
should be destroyed. Ezek. XXIX. 30. There were princes of Egypt for more 
than 300 years after Ezekiel, and idols still longer. 

Jehovah should scrape the dust from Tyre and make her like the top of a 
rock, according to some writer who interpolated the book of Ezekiel. Tyre 
was destroyed 300 years after Ezekiel. 

Isaiah foretold (Ch. XIII.) that Babylon should never be inhabited, but 
should be the abode of wild beasts. Babylon was a great city for several 
centuries after Isaiah's time. 



SEC. XXXI.] PREDICTED COMING OP CHRIST. 81 

Christ's kingdom was to appear at Jerusalem during the first century. Mat. 
XXIV. 30-34; Mark XIII. 29, 30; Luke XVII. 22-37; XIX. 11; XXIV. 21 ; 
XXI. 5-36. 

This prediction of the immediate coming of Christ is the most important pro- 
phecy in the Bible. It is clear as language can make it, and the sincere Chris- 
tians of the first century were constantly looking for doomsday, like the crazy 
Millerites in our own times. Matthew says, (XXIV. 30, 31,) " And then shall 
appear the sign of the son of man in heaven ; and then shall all the tribes of the 
earth mourn, and they shall see the son of man coming in the clouds of heaven 
with power and great glor} r , and he shall send his angels with a great sound of a 
trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one 
end of heaven to the other." * * "* "Verily I say unto you, This genera- 
tion shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled." (V. 34). Mark and Luke 
are equally explicit. 



THE MOEALITY OF THE BIBLE. 



XXXII. After the miraculous evidence, as it is styled, was attacked so suc- 
cessfully that it lost most of its weight, the advocates of Christianity placed 
their main reliance upon the testimony furnished by the " perfect morality " of 
the Gospel in favor of the divine inspiration of its authors. Little praise is 
given however to the moral precepts of the Old Testament, or rather the subject 
is studiously avoided, for the very good reason that the Hebrew prophets had 
veiy crude notions of human rights and duties. 

Moses legalized slavery. In Leviticus, XXV. 44-46, he s&y?, of " the heathens 
that are round about you," and " of the children of strangers that do sojourn 
among you" " shall ye buy" and " they shall be your bond-men forever; but 
over your brethren, the children of Israel, ye shall not rule over one another 
with rigor." It appears from Exodus, XXI. 7, that Hebrew women were held 
in perpetual slavery, and the inference may justly be drawn from Deuteronomy 
(XXI. 14j that the enslaved Hebrew women, if not married to their masters, 



82 THE MORALITY OF THE BIBLE. [SEC. XXXII. 

might be legally sold to any Israelite. There are marry passages going to show 
that slavery existed among the Hebrews, that it was recognised by the priests 
as lawful and right: and the Bible in no place expressly forbids human bondage. 
This omission to forbid slavery is in itself equivalent to an acknowledgment 
that the institution is proper. The Bible claims to be a complete guide fjr all 
the moral actions which man is called upon to perform. Such a guide cannot 
be complete unless it expressly forbid those great sins which are most common 
among men. Moses saw fit to denounce murder, theft, perjury, blasphemy, 
idol-worship, Sabbath breaking, and many minor and even insignificant offences, 
"but slavery is repeatedly mentioned without a word of discountenance. 

Polygamy and concubinage were both sanctioned by the practice, and not 
forbidden by the law of the Jews. See Gen. XX. 17 ; XXX. 39 ; Ex. XXI. 8 ; 
Num. XXXI. 3, 17, 18; Deut. XX. 13 ; XXI. 11 ; Judg s XIX. 2 ; 2 S. III. 2 ; 

XX. 3 ; 2 Ch. XI. 21 ; 1 K. XI. 3. In the eighteenth chapter of Leviticus, Moses 
takes occasion to spend his wrath very freely upon those who indulge in unlaw- 
ful amorous delights, but there is nothing said against the possession of scores 
of wives or concubines. 

The Jewish law allowed, and Jewish custom required the nearest relative of 
a man who had been killed, to follow and assassinate the homicide, even if the 
latter was excusable or even justifiable in the killing. Kitto* remarks: " The 
Mosaical law (Num. XXXY. 31) expressly forbids the acceptance of a ransom 
for the forfeited life of a murderer, although it might be saved by his seeking 
an asylum at the altar of the tabernacle, in case the homicide was accidentally 
committed, (Ex. XXI. 13 ; 1 K. I. 50 ; II. 28). If, however, after Judaism had 
been fully developed, no other sanctuary had been tolerated but that of the 
temple at Jerusalem, the chances of escape of such a homicide from the hands 
of the avenger ere he reached the gates of the temple, must have become less in 
proportion to the distance of the spot, where the murder was committed, from 
Jerusalem; six cities of refuge were therefore appointed for the momentary 
safety of the murderer, in various parts of the kingdom, the roads to which 
were kept in good order to facilitate escape. Thither the avenger durst not 
follow him, and there he lived in safety until a proper examination had taken 
place befoie the authorities in order to ascertain whether the murder was a 
wilful act or not. In the former case he was instantly delivered up to the god, 
or avenger of blood, against whom not even the altar could protect him, (Ex. 

XXI. 14; 1 K. II. 29); in the latter case, though he was not actually delivered 
into the hands of the (joel, he was, notwithstanding, not allowed to quit the pre- 
cincts of the town, but was obliged to remain there all his lifetime, or till the 
death of the high priest." 

* Popular Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, by Bishop Kitto. 



SEC. XXXII.] MOSAIC LAW OF REVENGE. 83 

There are a few precepts of a high morality scattered through the Pentateuch, 
but they are completely lost in the great mass of grosser matter. The teaching, 
"love thy neighbor as thyself is most effectively contradicted, ana its influence 
for good destro}'ed, by its insertion in the midst of such a multitude of priestly 
rules as are contained in Leviticus. The pervading spirit of the Old Testament 
is wrong. The book was the work of rude men in a rude age, when every tribe 
in Western Asia had its exclusive language or dialect; when, for want of a 
common language, and in the absence of commercial relations, there was little 
friendly intercourse between foreign nations, and when each tribe had its sepa- 
rate priesthood which found its interest in discouraging all mixture with foreign 
nations. The Bible has no regard for the rights or feelings of the Gentiles ; 
they might be held in bondage forever, their land and cities might be taken, 
the men, if obstinate, were to be slaughtered, and even the friendly strangers 
in Jerusalem might be swindled into buying for provision the meat of animals 
that had died by disease. The Jews, though the fit vorites of Heaven, were 
governed according to a code far more bloody and illiberal than that which 
prevailed among the more civilized nations of the same ages. Morell acknow- 
ledges that " an imperfect morality is plainly discernible throughout the period 
of the Old Testament dispensation, and frequently embodied too in the Old 
Testament Scriptures. The fierce spirit of warfare, the law of retaliation, the 
hatred of enemies, the curses and imprecations poured upon the wicked, the 
practice of polygamy, the frequent indifference to deception to compass any 
desirable purposes, the existence of slavery, the play, generally speaking, given 
to the stronger passions of our nature — all these bespeak a tone of moral feeling 
far below that which Christianity has unfolded." Even if the writings of Moses 
and the other Jewish prophets had not expressly taught the Hebrews to system- 
atically violate the rights of the poor and strange persons, yet the lineaments in 
which Jehovah and his favorites are painted would be enough to show that no 
high morality could prevail where these Scriptures were received as divine. 
The Mosaic Deity was a cruel, blood-thirsty, vindictive, changeable, deceitful 
character, who delighted in slaying tens of thousands to avenge a fancied insult, 
or in leading his blind worshippers to slay the males and married women and 
carry offinto captivity and concubinage the unprotected virgins of some heathen 
tribe. 

The morality of Jesus is full of mildness and universal love and charity. A 
common expression among Christian writers is, that his moral precepts are 
sufficient in themselves to prove his divine mission and to entitle the Bible to 
our belief and reverence. Many of the greatest and purest free-thinkers liuve 
not hesitated to declare that there were no rules of moral conduct equal to those 
contained in the Sermon on the Mount, lleuneil, Franklin, Strauss, Rousseau, 



84 MORALITY OF THE BIBLE. [SEC. XXXII. 

Goethe, Voltaire, Paine and Rammohun Roy, while opposing the Christian 
Church, have all expressed their admiration of the moral character of Jesus.* 

And yet, in the face of all this authority, I venture to contend that the moral 
teachings of Jesus are highly objectionable, and that no man can live by tLem, 
or should endeavor to live by them. They are indeed mild and kind in spirit, 
but they err as much in inculcating humility, as did Moses upon the other side 
in encouraging his followers to hate and despise and avoid all Gentiles. The 
founder of Christianity could not tolerate the old Hebrew law of " an eye for 
an eye," and "a tooth for a tooth," and blood for blood — even if the first 
blood had been shed accidentally or justifiably ; but he taught that the child 
must submit to the parent, the wife to the husband, the servant aDd the slave 
to the master, and the subject to the ruler; and all this unconditionally. His 
teaching will appear more clearly from the texts : 

Children must obey their parents — Eph. VI. 1 ; Col. III. 20. 

Servants must obey their masters — Eph. VI. 5-7 ; Col. III. 22 ; 1 Tim. VI. 1 ; 
Titus II. 9 : 1 Peter II. 11. 

"Servants obey in all tilings your masters." Col. III. 22. 

"Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters as 
worthy of all honor." 1 Tim. VI. 1. 

"Exhort servants to be obedient to tueir own masters, and to please them 
well in all things." Titus II. 9. 

" Servants be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and 
gentle, but also .o the froward." 1 Peter II. 18. 

The word translated " servants," in these passages, is douloi in the original 
Greek; and doufoi was applied to all servants, but more particularly to heredi- 
tary slaves, of whom there were a great number at the time and place in which 
these Scriptures were written. 

Wives must obey their husbands. Eph. V. 22-24, 33 ; Col. III. 13 ; Titus II. 
5; 1 Peter III. 1. "The head of every man is Christ, and the head of the 
woman is the man." 1 Cor. XI. 2. 

The people must obey the priests : Mat. X. 14 ; Luke X. 16 ; 1 Cor. IV. 1 ; 
Gal. VI. 1 ; 1 Thess. IV. 8 ; 1 Tim. V. 17 ; Heb. XIII. 7, 17. In the verse 
last cited, Paul says: "Obey them that have the rule over }~ou, and submit 
yourselves, for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account." 

Subjects must obey their rulers. 

" Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers: For there is no power 
but of God ; the powers that be are ordained of God: [Tyrants, demagogues and 
fools included]. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordi- 

* See Appendix, Note 6, for quotations from Hennell, Franklin, Rousseau, Goethe, 
Voltaire, Paine and Rammohun Roy. 



SEC. XXXII.] SUBMISSION TO TYRANNY. 85 

nance of God; and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation." 
Kom. XIII. 1, 2. 

" He [the ruler] is the minister of God to thee for good.' 'Rom. XIII. 4. 

"Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magis- 
trates." Titus III. 1. 

"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake : whether 
it be to the king as supreme ; or unto governors as unto them that are sent by 
him." 1 Peter II. 13, U. 

" Fear God. Honor the King." 1 Peter II, 17. 

Men must never resist evil or oppression. 

" I say unto you that ye resist not evil ; but whosoever shall smite thee on 
thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at 
law, and take away thy coat, let him have ihy cloak also. And whosoever shall 
compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain." Mat. V. 39-42. 

" Unto him that smiteth thee on one cheek, offer also the other ; and of him 
that taketh away thy goods ask them not again." Luke VI. 20, 

"Being persecuted, we suffer it." 1 Cor. IT. 12. 

" Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his 
steps." I Peter II. 21. 

These precepts may appear to be very lovely, very beautiful, very poetic, and 
very philanthropic ; but if put in practice on any large scale, they would be 
productive of far more evil than the bloody code of Moses. These precepts are 
unqualified; they are not contradicted in any portion of the Xew Testament; 
they are frequently repeated and inculcated with great earnestness, and in 
mauy passages they are made absolute. Peter says : "Submit yourselves to 
every ordinance of man." Paul says, " There is no power but of God ;" and 
Christ says, "resist not evil." They never say, " If ye are outrageously op- 
pressed, and can easily relieve yourselves of oppression with little pain to any 
one, then ye shall so relieve yourselves"; but they do say, "unto him that 
smiteth thee on one cheek, offer the other also." The Evangelists tell us, in 
accordance with divine inspiration, that the omnipotent and all-wise God came 
down to earth to redeem mankind, and lived like a man among men for thirty 
years. If this be true, it is probable that, as is asserted of Jesus, all the actions 
of the divinity were examples which mankind should constantly aspire to imi- 
tate; and his conduct while on earth should furnish examples for men to follow 
in every circumstance in which they could be placed. Jesus, the reputed 
divinity, was repeatedly abused and maltreated, and finally he was executed by 
his enemies; yet never did he resist evil, although if possessed of omnipotent 
power as is claimed, he might have none so with results incalculably beneficial 
to the human race. Hence it follows that no Christian can, consistently with 



86 MORALITY OF THE BIBJ [SEC. XXXII. 

the teachings of his revelation, resist the rod of a tyrant or the lash of a master. 
It is strange that such doctrine should be extensively received as gospel, par- 
ticularly among those nations which are the most free and the most ready to 
defend their rig :e ; and perhaps it is almost as strange that any man 

should ever have promulgated it, but as we have shown Sec. XXII. the pecu- 
liar circumstances in which Christ was placed, made it necessary for him to 
preach passive submissi -n. Snch doctrines never have been put in practice by 
any nation aud never will be. The Quakers, who are non-resistants almost 
as thorough in practice as in theory, have been but a very small proportion of 
the nations wheie they have existed, and they have existed only in the most 
enlightened communities and in places comparatively free from the horrors of 
war. The Puritans of England made perhaps the grandest attempt recorded in 
ly to practice the doctrines of the Bible, but they found that Samuel hew- 
ing Agag to pieces before the Lord in Gilgal was a better saint for a people 
determined to preserve their liberties, than Paul with that outrageous lie, " the 
powers that be are ordained of God." 

It may be said that the earth would soon become a paradise if all men would 
only practice love to all men and non-resistance to evil. But what folly to talk 
of this when it never can occur ! Gospels should be suited for men as they are. 
It may also be said that Jesus, in teaching passive submission, meant only to 
teach a reasonable humility, and to impress as forcibly as possible the import- 
ance of The most generous self-saeritice for the good of others. It might also 
:-es told the Jews to slay all the males aud married women 
of the heathen, and save the girls for concubines, he meant only to iuculc:. 
: spirit of seif-de: 

The Xew Testament permits slavery and polygamy since it does not expressly 
prohibit them, and since they were lawful under the Mosaic law, and must 
remain lawful until expressly forbidden. Christianity is a faith which, if 
followed as strictly as possible, is fit only for slaves, and it was devised by a 
slave of the great Roman empire, who was wise enough to see that any attempt 
to resist the Cesars would only end in his own destruction. 



TRUTH OF HISTORICAL STATEMENTS. 



XXXII L Some of the statements of the Bible in regard to historical events 
deserve examination • and the account of creation, and of the antediluvian 
history of the world will be first in order. 



CREATION AND ANTEDILUVIAN HISTORY. 



XXXIV. The Mosaic account of creation and the early history of the world 
require us to believe that : — 

1. God never made anything before he made the earth; and therefore he 
must have spent an eternity in idleness. 

2. He made the earth six thousand years ago. 

3. He spent five days in making the earth and the animals and vegetables 
upon it. 

4. Be made all the other worlds and planets in one day. 

5. He made the earth before he made any of the other planets, 

6. He made the planets only to mark time for the earth. 

7. He made the earth only to serve as a residence for man. The earth as 
compared with the remainder of the planets is no more than a drop of water is 
to the earth. What would men say if they should discover that the worms in 
a particular drop of water had a religious faith, that the universe was made for 
them, that their drop was made the first of all things, that the Lord spent five 



88 CREATION AND ANTEDILUVIAN HISTORY. [SEC. XXXIV. 

days in creating and perfecting their drop, and only one day in making all the 
rest of the universe ? 

8. God made the light two days before he made the sun, moon and stars. 

9. He placed a supply of water in the sky. It was very natural for the igno- 
rant to suppose that there is a large body of water where the rain comes from. 
Philosophy tells us that there is no water in the sky till it begins to fall. Moses 
put water there, before there was a sun to raise the vapor by evaporation ; and 
yet he would have us believe that there was no rain tor sixteen hundred years. 
(Gen. II. 5. IX. 13). 

10. God made the vegetable kingdom before the animal. Geology says that 
there were no vegetables before the time when the coal beds began to be depo- 
sited; while fur thousands of years before, many kinds of animals abounded, 
and their remains are found in the stones below the coal. 

11. Man ate no meat for sixteen hundred years, though Abel was " a keeper 
of sheep." 

12. Animals, the same which we have now, ate no meat for sixteen hundred 
years. (Gen. I. 30. VI. 19, 20). 

13. Moses was ignorant that man is an animal. 

14. Man was made sinless and happy, and ignorant of right and wrong. 

15. Man while ignorant of wrong was persuaded to do wrong by a snake 
which could speak. 

16. Man for doing wrong unconsciously was punished by being made subject 
to sin and misery. The story that men were formerly without sin and perfectly 
happy, and were reduced to their present state for some offense to the gods, 
was a common tradition or myth in ancient times. 

17. The naught} r serpent, which could talk, was punished by a curse that it 
and all its kind should for ever go upon their bellies, and eat dust and be hated 
by mau. Did the snakes in Paradise go upon feet or walk upright upon their 
tails ? If they went on their bellies before the temptation, what was the punish- 
ment ? If they did not go on their bellies, were they snakes ? Snakes do not 
eat dust now, neither are they universally hated. The Egyptians worshipped 
the asp for many ages. 

18. Men before the deluge lived sometimes to be nine hundred and fifty years 
old, and generally to the age of about seven hundred. 

19. After men had increased for seventeen hundred years, Jehovah became 
so angry at the sms of mankind, that he sent a great deluge to cover the whole 
earth, (Gen.YI. 17. VII. 19, 22), and kill all men and animals, except a few 
of each species, which were preserved in an ark. How the ark floated or the 
animals lived above the tops of the highest mountains, where the most intense 
and fatal cold now prevails constantly, is not explained. Neither is it explained 



SEC. XXXIV.] THE DELUGE. 89 

what became of the water, for there is not enough now to cover the mountains. 
Though the water stood upon the earth for ten months, above the tops of the 
highest mountains, the trees apparently were still flourishing several miles 
down beiow. The dove found a fresh olive leaf. Trees now a-days are not so 
tough in their vitality. 

Such are some of the wonderful events recorded by Moses; events for which 
we can find no parallel since reliable historical records have been made, except 
in such books as Gulliver's Travels and Sinbad the sailor. An Irish curate after 
reading Gulliver's Travels said : — " There are some things in that book whic-i 
I cannot believe." Geologists cannot believe that there has ever been a uni- 
versal deluge, and astronomers will not believe that the sun and stars were 
created in one-fifth the time devoted to the creation of the earth. 



CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE. 



XXXV. The chronology of the Bible teaches that the earth and universe 
were made about six thousand years ago, but the science of geology says that 
the earth has existed many millions of years, and astronomy says that many of 
the stars must have been existing for hundreds of thousands of years, or their 
light would not yet have reached us, so far are they away. After it was found 
that geology could not be reconciled with the Bible, the Christians began en- 
deavoring to reconcile the Bible to geology. It is said that the " days" of 
creation were long periods — perhaps of many millions of years each — but Moses 
says, those " days" had an evening and a morning, and in Ex. XX, 10, 11, 
the prophet again speaks of these six days as though they had been ordinary 
days of twenty-four hours each. If however those "days" were periods of 
thousands or millions of years each, then God mast have rested an equal period, 
"the seventh day," during which time Adam and Eve lived in Paradise; 
whereas we know (according to Moses) tnat Adam could have remained in 
Paradise for only a short period comparatively. 

From Adam to Shem there was a period of one thousand six hundred and 
fifty-eight years, and in this time there were eleven generations averaging 



90 CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE. fsEC, XXXV. 

one hundred and fifty years each. From Arphaxad to Isaac was four hundred 
and ninety years, with ten generations of forty-nine years each. Between Jacob 
and David, a period of nine hundred and fifty=six years, there were eleven 
generations of eighty-six years each on an average, showing a wonderful in- 
crease in the length of the generations subsequent to Isaac. During this latter 
period, we have not the years of each generation, as we have during all the rest 
of the time from Adam down to 600 B. C. Moses says (Ps. XC.) that in his 
day, the utmost limit of human life was eighty years. 

From Solomon to Christ was a period of one thousand years : and of thirty- 
nine generations of twenty-six years each on an average, according to Matthew, 
and of fifty-three generations, with nineteen years each, on an average, ac- 
cording to Luke. Moses says (Gen. XL VII. 9) that Jacob was one hundred 
and thirty years old when he entered Egypt, and that the Israelites were four 
hundred and thirty years in Egypt, (Ex. XII. 40, 41), but Paul asserts (Gal. 
III. 17), that the time between the call of Abraham and the departure from 
Egypt was four hundred and thirty years. Paul is evidently wrong. 

According to 1 K. VI. 1, it was four hundred and eighty years after the 
Exodus that the temple was commenced. The writer of Acts says (XIII. 21), 
that Saul reigned forty years; David reigned forty years (1 K. II. 11); and 
Solomon reigned four years before beginning the temple ; and thus we have 
nine hundred and sixty-six years from the birth of Jacob to the building of the 
temple, in the year lull B. C. In Acts XIII. 20, it is said, there were judges 
over Israel for four hundred and fifty years, and yet there were only six gene- 
rations among the forefathers of David duriug that time. 

Ve are told (1 C. VI. 1, 2, 3) that Moses was the grandson of Kohath, who 
went with Jacob to Egypt, (Gen. XL VI. 11), and was the contemporary of 
Korah, (Num. XVI. 1), another grandson of Kohath, and with Xashon (Xum, 
I. 7), the great grandson of Phares, who went with Jacob to Egypt. The Is- 
raelites when they went to Egypt numbered there seventy persons, (Gen. XL VI. 
27). In three generations, or during the lives of Kohath, Amram, and Moses, 
those Israelites increased from seventy persons to be six hundred and three 
thousand, five hundred and fifty fighting men, or three millions in all; aud in 
this number, the Levites, one-twelfth of the whole nation, were not counted, 
(Num. I. 46). The five sons of Judah had increased to seventy-four thousand 
fighting men, or at the modest rate of a duplication every twenty-five years. 
During a considerable portion of this time — four hundred years — (see Gen. XV. 
13), the Israelites were sorely tasked (Ex. I. 13. V. 5). From Isaac to Solo- 
mon, there were twelve generations : from Isaac to Azariah, Solomon's High 
Priest, there were eighteen generations : and from Isaac to Heman, Solomon's 
saintly singer, there were twenty-two generations, (1 Ch. VI.) ; whence it ap- 



SEC. XXXV.] INCREASE OP THE JEWS. 91 

pears that the holy Levites were better propagators before the Lord than those 
who ate not of the fat of the sacrifices, Ezra (VII. 1-5) was only fourteen 
generations from Phineas, who was a priest in the time of Moses (1450 B. C). 
This would give seventy years for a generation : and yet during less than 
one-half that period, there were twenty kings on the throne of Judah. 

The difficulties of this chronology, however, do not end with the internal 
evidence, but are greatly increased by the contradictions of profane history. It 
is generally conceded among learned Christians that the common version of the 
Bible is wrong in its chronology. Milman says, " It is greatly to be regretted 
that the chronology of the earlier Scriptures should ever have been made a 
religious question." Pritchard, in his " Physical History of Man," says, "bib- 
lical writers had no revelation on the subject of chronology ;" and he asserts 
that men have existed upon earth for hundreds of thousands of years. No 
learned man pretends to say the earth was made only six thousand years ago. 
We have incontestable proof" according to such celebrated men as Champollion, 
Bunsen, Boeckh, Barucchi, Kenrick, Henny, Lesueur, Hincks, Lepsius and 
Gliddon, that we have Egyptian monuments extending to a time beyond that 
given as the date of the flood* Geologists of high rank, Lyell, Agassiz and 
others, have expressed their conviction, founded upon fossil remains and anti- 
quities found buried under numerous strata of the earth's surface, that man has 
existed on earth for some fifteen or twenty thousand years at least. Lyell says 
that the Falls of Niagara, and the delta of the Mississippi bear evidence that 
their respective streams have been running in their present courses for fifty 
thousand years. To escape from all this, it has been admitted that the chronology 
of the common version of the Bible is incorrect. If this be so, we must throw 
away the genealogy of Christ, as given in the New Testament, and with that 
must go the divine inspiration of the whole Gospel. 

* S«e Appendix, Note 7. 



STUBBOKNNESS OF THE JEWS. 



XXXVI. The stubbornness of the Jews, recorded by Moses as a natural 
occurrence, not caused by any special interposition of Jehovah, if received as 
true, deserves to be considered as presenting some of the most singular pheno* 
mena in the history of the human mind. The march through the wilderness 
after leaving Egypt was accompanied with a vast number of miracles, of which 
there were thirty-one of the first magnitude, and all of which were performed 
in the sight of the whole people ; miracles so great that on two separate occa- 
sions more than fourteen thousand incredulous and stiff-necked Israelites were 
killed by the hand of Jehovah. Yet after all these wonders, which were to be 
seen every month, if not every day, the Hebrew people as a body rebelled 
against the Almighty God and his ministers no less than eleven times within a 
few years. Gibbon remarks, " The devout and even scrupulous attachment to 
the Mosaic religion, so conspicuous among the Jews who lived under the second 
temple, [from 535 B. C. to 60 A. D.] becomes still more surprising if it is com- 
pared with the stubborn incredulity of their forefathers. When the law was 
given on Mount Sinai, when the tides of the ocean and the courses of the 
planets were suspended for the convenience of the Israelites, and when temporal 
rewards and punishments were the immediate consequences of their piety and 
disobedience, they perpetually relapsed into rebellion against the visible majesty 
of their divine king, placed the idols of the nations in the sanctuary of Jehovah, 
and imitated ever}' fantastic ceremony that was practiced in the tents of the 
Arabs or in the cities of Phoenicia. The contemporaries of Moses and Joshua 
had beheld with careless indifference the most amazing miracles. Under the 
pressure of every calamity, the belief of those miracles has preserved the Jews 
of a later period from the universal contagion of idolatry ; and in contradiction 
to every known principle of the human mind, that singular people seems to 
have yielded a stronger and more ready assent to the traditions of their remote 
ancestors than to the evidence of their own senses." 

References are here given whereby the accounts of the principal of these 
miracles and rebellions may be found in the books of Moses. 



8EC. XXXVI.] MOSAIC MIRACLES AND JEWISH REBELLIONS. 93 

The Jews believed the first teachings of Moses and Aaron, who sought to rid 
their tribe from the yoke of the Egyptians. Ex. IY. 30, 31. 

Jehovah renewed his promise of favor to Israel. Ex. VI. 4. 

He turned the waters of Egypt to blood. Ex. VII. 19. 

He covered the land with frogs. Ex. VIII. 6. 

He turned the dust into lice. Ex. VIII. 16. 

He filled the land with flies. Ex. VIII. 24. 

He slew all the cattle of Egypt. Ex. IX. 6. 

He covered the Egyptians with boils. Ex. IX. 10. 

He sent a fiery hail upon Egypt. Ex. IX. 24. 

He filled Egypt with locusts. Ex. X. 13. 

He covered Egypt with a deep darkness. Ex. X. 22. 

He slew the first-born of every Egyptian family. Ex. XII. 30. 

The Israelites murmured. Ex. XIV. 10. 

Jehovah sent pillars of fire and clouds to lead the Jews. Ex. XIV. 20.J 

Passage of the Red Sea with a great miracle. Ex. XIV. 21. 

The Israelites murmured. Ex. XV. 24. 

Waters of Marah miraculously sweetened. Ex. XV. 25. 

The Israelites expressed their regret that they had not died in Egypt by 
God's hand. Ex. XVI. 3. 

Quails and manna foretold and sent by miracle. Ex. XVI. 4-14.J 

The Israelites disobeyed Moses. Ex. XVI. 20, 27. 

The Israelites murmured. Ex. XVII. 1. 

Water furnished to the Jews by miracle. Ex. XVII. 6. 

The Jews conquered the Amalekites by the aid oi a great miracle. Ex. 
XVII. 11, 12, 

Jehovah sent a message to the Jews, and they promised to obey. Ex. XIX. 8. 

Jehovah descended upon Siuai in fire and smoke. Ex. XIX. 16-18. 

The Jews saw, feared, stood afar off" and begged Moses to " let not God speak 
to us lest we die." Ex. XX. 18, 19. 

All the Jews promised obedience to all the ordinances of God. Ex. XXIV. 3. 

The Glory of the Lord dwelt six days on Mount Sinai, and the sight of it 
was like a devouring fire in the eyes of the Hebrews. Ex. XXIV. 16. 

Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abisha, seventy elders, and the nobles of Israel, saw 
God. Ex. XXIV. 10, 11. 

While Moses was upon the Mount, the Israelites induced Aaron, (previously 
consecrated as high priest of Jehovah,) to make the Golden Calf, which they 
worshipped. Ex. XXXII. 1-4. 

Jehovah appeared in a cloud at the Tabernacle door, and the Hebrews 
"every man at his tent door," worshipped. Ex. XXXIII. 10. 



94 STUBBORNNESS OF THE JEWS. [SEC. XXXVL 

The Israelites willingly brought offerings to the Lord- Ex= XXXV. 90 ; 
XXXVI. 5. 

They did all that the Lord commanded to Moses. Ex. XXXIX. 32, 42, 43. 

The cloud of the Lord by day and his fire by night rested upon the Taberna- 
cle in the sight of ail the house of Israel. Ex. XL. 38. 

The Glory of the Lord appeared to all the people ; and a fire came from before 
the Lord and consumed upon the altar the burnt offering and the fat; and all 
the people saw and shouted and fell on their faces. Lev. IX. 23, 24. 

The Israelites murmured. Num. XI. 1-6. 

They lamented that they had not died in Egypt, and they proposed to return. 
Num. XIV. 2-4. 

Jehovah was exceedingly provoked, and his Glory appeared on the Taberna- 
cle before all the children of Israel. Num. XIV. 10, 11. 

Jehovah slew all who spake evil of the promised land. Num. XIV. 36. 

Two hundred and fifty princes of Israel rebelled against Moses and Aaron, 
and the rebels were consumed with all the tribe of Korah ; and all Israel that 
were round about fled, for fear they should be consumed likewise. Num. XVI. 
32, 35. 

The next day the Jews murmured against Moses and Aaron for slaying the 
people of the Lord. [!] Num. XVI. 41. 

A cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the Glory of the Lord appeared. Num. 
XVI. 42. 

Jehovah slew 14,700 of the murmuring Jews. Xum. XVI. 49. 

Every Israelite prepared a rod with his name upon it, and Aaron's rod was 
miraculously exalted above all ; and the people thereupon appealed to Moses 
and Aaron to be protected from death. Xum. XYII. 1-13. 

The Israelites murmured and lamented that they had not died in Egypt. Num. 
XX. 2-5. 

The Glory of the Lord appeared to them. Xum. XX. 6. 

Moses brought water from the rock at Meribah by miracle. Xum. XX. 7. 

The Jews became discouraged and murmured against Jehovah and Moses, 
and exclaimed, "Wherefore have ye brought us up out of the land of Egypt to 
die in the wilderness." Xum. XXI. 4, 5. 

Jehovah plagued them with fieiy serpents, and many died. Xum. XXI. 6. 

Moses made a brazen serpent and hoisted it upon a pole, and all the wounded 
who looked upon it were healed. Xum. XXL 9. 

Israel committed idolatry and whoredom. Xum. XXV. 1, 2. 

Jehovah slew 24,000 Jews in a plague for their sins. Xum. XXV. 9. 



MIRACULOUS POWEES OF WITCHES AXD SORCERERS. 



XXXVIL The prophets and apostles asserted directly and indirectly the 

power of witches and sorcerers to perform miracles. See Ex, TIL 11, 22 ; Till, 

7 ; Lev. XIX. SI ; XX. 6 ; Dent. XIII. 1 ; XVIII. 11 ; Is. XXYHL 7 ; Mat 

VII. 22 ; XII. -27 ; XXIV, U ; Mark IX. 38 ; Luke IX. 50 ; Acts VIII. 9 ; XIII. 

2 Cor. XL 13 : 2 K. XXIII. 24. 



THE EXISTENCE OF RACES OF GIANTS. 



XXXVIIL Races of giants are frequently spoken of in the Old. Testament. 
Amos II. 9 speaks of giants as tall as cedars. Moses says that Og, the rem- 
nant of a race of giants bid a bedstead fifteen and a half feet long. See Gen. 
XIV. o; Deut II. 10, 11 ; Josh. XV. 8; XVII. 15; XVIII. 16. 



POSSESSION OF THE HUMAN BODY BY DEVILS. 



XXXIX. The belief that insanity, epilepsy and some ether diseases were 
caused by the entrance of devils into the human body was common among 
superstitious people in ancient times, and was received as true by the apostles. 
See Mat. IX. 32 ; X. 1, 8 ; XI. 18 ; XII. 27, &c. 



THE MASSACRE OF THE INNOCENTS. 



XL. Matthew says, (II. 16), that when Herod heard of the birth of Jesus, 
"the King of the Jews," he was troubled, and for fear ordered that "all the 
children that were in Bethlehem and in all the coasts thereof, from two years 
old and under," should be slain. Hennell remarks that this wholesale murder 
"is not mentioned by the other three Evangelists, nor by Josephus, although 
the latter is very minute in detailing the barbarities of Herod. The conduct 
attributed to Herod is in itself absurd : he makes no search after the one dan- 
gerous child, to whom the visit of the wise men must have afforded a good clue, 
but slays the children of a whole town and the adjoining country in a mass. It 
is inconceivable that any fit of anger should lead a politic old king, however 
tyrannical, to indulge in such useless and costly cruelty. And how could 
Josephus, who had filled thirty-seven chapters with the history of Herod, omit 
all allusions to such a wholesale murder? Lardner supposes tha. Josephus 
wilfully suppressed this tact, which is rather hard upon Josephus, since Mark, 
Luke, John,' and all other historians are as silent as he." 



CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS. 



XLI. We have seen that many events in the Bible recorded as having 
occurred naturally, never did so occur; and now we shall see that there are in 
the same book numerous contradictory statements, where it is impossible that 
both sides should be true or divinely inspired. 

In one place (Ex. VI. 3) it is said that God was not known to Abraham, Isaac 



SBC. XLI.j JEHOVAH OR SATAN ? 97 

and Jacob by the name of Jehovah. Yet in Genesis (XXVIII. IS; it is said 
that the Lord appeared to Jacob in a dream and told his own name (Jehovah 
in the Hebrew Bible). And elsewhere, (Gen. XXII. 14), it is said that Abraham 
called the place of the proposed sacrifice of Isaac, " Jehovah-jireh;" and in Gen. 
IV. 26, it is said, "then men began to call on the name of Jehovah." 

Moses says (Gen. XXXII. 19) that Jacob bought the field of Sychern, while 
Luke says (Acts VII. 15, 16) that Abraham bought it. 

There is a discrepancy between Genesis XLVI. 26, 27, and Acts VII. 14, 
in regard to the number of Israelites who went to Egypt with Jacob : Moses 
says there were sixty-six, and Luke says there were seventy-five. 

In the time of David there were 1,100,000 fighting men in Israel, according 
to 1 Ch. XXI. 5, 6 ; while, according to 2 8. XXIV. 9, there were only 800,000, 
showing a difference of thirty per cent. 

The number of measures of oil presented by Solomon to Hiram is represented 
in 1 K. V. 11, to have been 20, and in 2 Ch. II. 10 to have been 20,000. 

Was Bashemoth, Esau's wife, the daughter of Elon the Hittite, (Gen. XXVI. 
34), or was she an Ishmaelitish woman, (Gen. XXXVI. 2, 3)? 

In 1 K. XV. 1, 2, 9, it is said that King Abijam reigned only three years, and 
died before Jeroboam ; but in 2 Ch. XIII. 1, 2, 20, 21, XIV. 1, it is asserted 
that Jeroboam died before Abijah, and that the latter waxed mighty, married 
fourteen wives and begat two sons and fourteen daughters. 

We are told (1 K. XV. 33) that there was a war between Asa and Baasha al 
their days ; but elsewhere (2 Ch. XIV. 1, 6) we learn that in Asa's reign, during 
at least seven years of Baasha' s time, the land had peace. Baasha is represented 
in 1 K. XIV. 6, 8, to have died in the 26th year of Asa ; but according to 2 
Ch. XVI. 1., Baasha built Raman in the 36th year of Asa's reign. 

Did Omri begin to reign in the 31st (1 K. XVI. 23), or in the 27th year of 
Asa, (IK. XVI. 10, 15, 16)? 

Accordiug to 2 Ch. XXII. 2, Ahaziah was forty-two years old when he 
mounted the throne, but according to 2 K, VIII. -26, he was only twenty-two 
years old. 

There is a discrepancy of ten years in regard to the age of Jehoiachin when 
he began to reign, between 2 K. XXIV. 8, and 2 Ch. XXXVI. 9. 

Did Aaron die on the top of Mount Hor, on the way from Kadesh to the Red 
Sea, (Num. XX. 23), and also at Mosera on the way from Beeroth to Gudgodah, 
(Deut, X. 6)? 

David numbered Israel at the instigation of Jehovah, (2 S. XXIV. 1). David 
was provoked to number Israel by Satan, (1 Ch. XXI. 1). David numbered 
Israel only once. 

For the offense of numbering the people, David was permitted to choose one 
4 



98 CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS. [SEC. XLI^ 

of three grievous punishments proposed by Jehovah; and o-ne of these punish- 
ments was either a seven years' famine, (2 S.- XXIV. 13), or a three years r 
famine, (1 Ch. XXL 11, 12), 

The Ammonites are said, in 2 S. X. 6, to have hired one thousand men of 
King Maacah to fight ag-ainst Israel,- but in 1 Ch,- XIX. 7, it is said that they 
hired thirty-two thousand ehariots of Maacah — though there was not that num- 
ber of chariots in all Western Asia. In the battle seven hundred charioteers 
were slain according to 2 S. X. 18, and seven thousand ascording to 1 Ch. 
XIX. 18. 

Abraham did not leave Haran till after the death of his father Terah ; (Acts 
VII. 4). Terah died one huudred and thirty-five years after the birth of Abra- 
ham ; (Gen. XI. 32). Abraham left Haran when he was seventy-five years old,, 
(Gen. XII. 4). 

Jeremiah (XXI. 9) advised the Israelites to desert to the Chaldeans : and 
he denied (XXXVII. 14) that be gave such advice; and then we are told that 
he was cast into two different prisons for giving that advice (Jer. XXXVII. 16 r 
XXXVIII. 6). 

The author of the book of Joshua (X. 13) quotes the book of Jasher as 
authority for the arrest of the sun by Joshua, and the author of Kings (1 K. L 
18) quotes the same book to prove the sayings of Saul four huudred years later, 

" God did tempt Abraham," Gen. XXII. 1. 

" God tempteth not any man," James I. 13. 

Saul was muGh pleased with David before the battle with Goliah, (1 S. XVL 
21, 22). After the death of Goliah David was an entire stranger to Sau:. (1 S. 
XVIL 55). Bayle remarks in his famous article on David : — " It is somewhat 
strange that Saul did not know David that day, since that young man had 
played several times on his musical instrument before him, to disperse those 
black vapors which molested him. If such a narrative as this should be found 
in Thucydides, or in Liv}^, all the critics would unanimously conclude that the 
transcribers had transposed the pages ; forgot something in one place ; repeated 
something in another, or inserted some preposterous additions in the author's 
work. But no such suspicions ought to be entertained of the Bible." 

" Joram begat Ozias," according to Matthew (I. 8); but according to 2 Ch. 
XXII. XXIII. XXIV. XXV. Ozias was the great, great grandson of Joram. 
Dr. Doddridge supposes that Matthew intended to punish Ahaziah for his 
wickedness, by leaving his name out ! 

Did Peter deny Christ to a man (John XVIII. 26. Luke XXII. 58), or to a 
maid ? (Mat. XXVI. 71. Mark XIV. 69). 

Matthew says (XXVII. 34) that at the Crucifixion hey gave Jesus "vinegar 
mixed with gall," but Mark (XV. 23) says " wine mixed with myrrh." 



-SEC. XLI.] THE FATE OF JUDAS t &§ 

Judas repented according to Mat-chew !XXVIL 3, and it is implied in Acts L 
■18, that he did not repent Matthew says he gave "back the thirty pieces of 
silver to the priests ; Acts says lie aid not. Matthew says the priests with that 
money bought afield to bury strangers; Acts says he bought a field for him- 
self. Matthew says he banged himself: according to Acts — "He burst asunder 
in the midst and all his bowels gushed out" Matthew accounts Tor the desig- 
nation of the stranger's graveyard, as the field of blood, by saying that it was 
"bought with the reward of iniquity : but Acts says it was because of Judas' 
tragic death {here. 

The expulsion of the money changers from the temple took place soon after 
'the baptism of Jesus, according to John (IL 13), but Matthew (XXI. 12) Mark 
%Xl. lb), and Luke (XIX. 45) place the e'veiit in the last visit to Jerusalem, and 
.just before the crucifixion. 

John (I. 28, 40, 41) says that Jesus called Simon and Andrew, at Bethabara 
beyond Jorclan, in the presence of John the Baptist, while MattheV says (IT. 
12, 18) the Call occurred at the sea of Galilee after the temptation on the mount 
and after John was Cast into prison. 

According to Matthew (til. 16. IT. 1, 2), Mark (I. 11, 12), ancl Luke (III. 
22. IV. 1, 2), Jesus after "being baptized by John was forthwith led out into 
the wilderness, and tempted by the devil during forty days: but John (I. 33, 
"35, 43. II. 1, 12, 13) completely excludes the temptation, ±Ie says "that on the 
first day after the baptism Jesus was with John, on the second day he con- 
versed with feter, on the third clay he attended the marriage in Cana, then he 
Went to Capernaum, ancl then to Jerusalem, so that it was impossible for him to 
have spent any forty days in the wilderness. 

John the Evangelist (L 29-34) says that John the Baptist '* bare record" of 
"Christ at the baptism : — "This is the son of God." Again, a few days later, 
and long before the imprisonment of the Baptist, the latter, in a long discourse, 
is represented saying : i( The Father loveth the son, and hath given all things 
into'his hand," (John ILL 27): and yet Matthew (XL 2), and Luke (VII. 18), 
state that when the Baptist was in prison, he sent two of his disciples to Jesus 
to learn whether he Was really the Christ, or whether he was only the fore- 
runner of a greater? Mark (L 11) says that at the baptism, there was a voice 
from Heaven : — " Thou art my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased." 
How then could John the Baptist doubt, himself being inspired, and having 
such evidence before him ? St. John must have manufactured those speeches ; 
for Apollos, an " eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures," who was a dis- 
ciple of the Baptist, knew not Christ, and long »fte* his death was baptising 
with the baptism of John, when he was converted by Paul, (Acts XVIII. 25 ; 
XIX. 3). 



"LOO CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS. |_SEC. XLl- 

Matthew, (IV. 12) and Mark ( I. 14) assert that Jesus did not go into Galilee 
until after the Baptist's imprisonment, but John states (III. S3) not only that 
Jesus went into Galilee immediately after the baptism and before the Baptist 
was imprisoned, but even baptised the latter in Judea. 

On the morning of the resurrection, says Matthew, (XXVIII. 1), Mary Mag* 
dalene and the other Mary went to the sepulchre. According to Mark (XVI. 2) 
Mary Magdalene, the other Mary, and Salome went. Luke tells Us (XXIII, 55. 
XXIV. 1-10), that Mary Magdalene, the other Mary, Joanna, "and other 
women,'' went together to the tomb ; and John (XX. 1) says that Mary Mag- 
dalene went to the tomb alone. 

Matthew states that an angel descended from Heaven and rolled away the 
stone as the women came. Mark says the stone was rolled away when the 
women arrived there, and when they entered, they saw a young man clothed 
in a long white garment, sitting on the right side. According to Luke, they 
found the stone rolled away, and inside after a little time they saw that " two 
men stood by them in shining garments." John says, Mary Magdalene found 
the stone relied away, and saw two angels "sitting the one at the head, and 
the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain." 

Matthew says that after the two women left the tomb, Jesus met them and 
requested them to tell Peter and the disciples to meet him in Galilee. Mark 
states that the young man in white requested the three women to direct the 
disciples to meet Jesus in Galilee. Luke asserts that the six or more women, 
finding the sepulchre empty, were told by the " two men in the shining gar- 
ments," that Jesus had arisen, saying nothing about going to Galilee ; and 
thereupon the woman told the apostles, who disbelieved, and Peter ran to 
the sepulchre to satisfy himself. John says, the one woman told Peter and 
John that the sepulchre was empty, whereupon those two " ran both together" 

to the tomb. 

According to Matthew, Jesus met the two women going from the sepulchre, 
requested them to send the eleven to meet him in Galilee, whither they went, and 
where he met them, and where "they worshipped him: but some doubted." 
Mark affirms that Jesus appeared first to Mary Magdalene, who went and told his 
disciples, and they " believed not." Afterwards he appeared to two of the apos- 
tles and these two told the others, who did not believe. Afterwards he appeared 
unto the eleven as they sat at meat and upbraided them with their unbelief, 
and " so then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was taken up into 
Heaven." Luke states that on the day of the resurrection, Christ appeared to 
two of the apostles on the road to Emmaus, and had a long conversation with 
them That same day he appeared to the eleven at meat in Jerusalem, ate 
" broiled fish, and of an honey comb," spoke with them for some time; led 



SfiC. XL1.) LAST WORDS OF JESUS ? 101 

them out as far as Bethany, and was carried up to Heaven before them. John 
says, that Jesus appeared in the sepulchre to Mary Magdalene, and the same 
day in the evening, he appeared to ten apostles, Thomas being absent. Eight 
days later, Christ met the whole eleven in the same place, and Thomas who 
then saw him for the first time after the resurrection being somewhat skeptical, 
stuck his finger into the hole to know whether it was there yet* Afterwards 
Jesus showed himself to the disciples at the sea of Tiberias. Acts says, Jesus 
was seen of the apostles for forty days after the resurrection. 

There is a remarkable discrepancy between the report given by the four 
Evangelists of the last words of Jesus to his apostles* 

Last words of Jesus, according to Matthew I — "All power is given unto me 
in Heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations; baptizing 
them in the name of the Father, and ot the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you : and 
lo I am With you always, even unto the end of the world." XXVIII. 18, 
19, 20. 

Last words of Jesus, according to Mark: — "Go ye into all the world, and 
preach the gospel to every creature* He that believeth and is baptized shall be 
saved ; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall 
follow them that believe ; in my name shall they cast out devils ; they shall 
speak with new tongues ; they shall take up serpents ; and if they drink any 
deadly thing it shall not hurt them ; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they 
shall recover." XVI. 1 5-18* 

Last words of Jesus, according to Luke: — "Thus it is written, and thus it 
behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day : and that 
repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all 
nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things* And, 
behold, I send the promise of my Father, upon you : but tarry ye in the city of 
Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high." XXIV. 46-49* 

The last words of Jesus, according to John : — "Peace be unto you! as my 
Father has sent me even so send I you* And when he had said this, he breathed 
on them, and saith unto them, receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whosesoever sins 
ye remit, they are remitted unto them ; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they 
are retained*" XX. 21-23. 

Thus we have seen that there are a number of false and contradictory state- 
ments in the Bible. It requires no argument to show that falsehood and con- 
tradiction are inconsistent with the theory of a divine inspiration. Paley says : 
" I know not a more rash or unphilosophical conduct of the understanding 
than to reject the substance of a story by reason of some diversity in the cir- 
cumstances with which it is related." We expect human witnesses to contra- 
dict each other : would the same be expected of divinely inspired prophets ? 



102 PERSONAL CREATOR. [?EC. XLtl. 

^Ve shall now consider whether there ore rot false and contradictory doc- 
trines in the Bible. 



EXISTENCE OF A PERSONAL CREATOR OP THE 
UNIVERSE, 



XLII. The Bible teaches that a G-od exists — a personal, conscious Deity, 
who created and governs the Universe, and exists independently of it. The 
existence of such a deity is here denied* First, there is no satisfactory proof of 
his existence; and, secondly, there is proof to the contrary* 

Christians argue thus : All human experience teaches that there can be no 
effect without a cause. The universe must be considered as an effect ; it is 
material, gross, unconscious ; it has not, so far as we know, an)* power in itself 
which could lead to the harmonious action and the intelligence which pervades 
all existence. The recognized forces of nature — gravitation, electricity, inertia^ 
heat, animal and vegetable life, and chemical affinity — are dependent for their 
origin and existence upon matter, and cannot create or destroy it. The exist- 
ence of the universe can only be accounted for by supposing it to have been 
•created by a Deity independent of it.- 

The harmony and adaptation of means to ends throughout the universe proves 
that it must have had an intelligent creator and governor. No man will believe 
that a watch could grow by accident. Then how should a man grow by acci- 
dent every inch of whose flesh is a thousand times more curious than all the 
watches in the world? Besides, the natural tendency in man's mind to seek 
some superior object for worship presupposes the existence of a God, and the 
general belief in a personal creator proves that the idea is in accordance with 
the general principles of human reason. 

On the negative, it is argued that the universe has not yet been proved to be 
an ■• effect;" and if it were, its cause would not necessarily be a deity. To 

* And yet the Bible does not say that Jehovah made the earth out of nothing. The 
word translated " created,' 5 in the first verse of Genesis, is the same word afterwards 
used to describe the creation of the animals out of material of the earths 



SEC. XLII.] PERSONAL CREATOR. 103 

assert that tne universe is an effect is to take the question for granted — the 
question whether the universe was created or existed from all eternity. If the 
universe must be an effect, would not its creator have been an effect also ? And 
if the creator of the universe had a creator, and he another creator, and so on, 
there would be no end, and no satisfaction." The wonderful adaptation of means 
to ends apparent throughout the universe cannot be denied by any reasonable man, 
but so far as science has gone she has not been able to find the hand of God. 
On the contrary, she has proved that the Deity is not the immediate actor, 
where he was universally supposed to be, by the ignorance and superstition of 
early ages. The revolutions of planets, the change of seasons, the constant ebb 
and flow of animal and vegetable life, the thunder, lightning and storm were 
formerly ascribed to the immediate divine influence, but all are now known to 
occur in accordance with, and in obedience to, general laws; and the forth er 
scientific investigation has been carried, the greater has been found to be the 
extent and influence of the general laws. Ignorance and superstition may 
lead a man to believe in a personal deity, but science certainly does not. She 
attempts to account for the present shape of the universe, and even to create 
animal life. 

The popular belief proves nothing. The idea that the human soul was imma- 
terial and would exist after death entirely independent of the body, led many 
to believe that there must be an immaterial personal deity, with whom the soul 
should take refuge after leaving the body. In another place I shall attempt to 
show that the soul cannot exist after death ; and we have no evidence whatever 
that spirit can exist independently of matter. If there were a deity such as is 
represented in the Bible, he would certainly not leave his existence and nature 
in doubt; whereas history tells us that in such diversity of opinions as prevail 
in regard to divine existence, more than half the human race must necessarily 
be wrong. 

It is said that the God of the Bible is all-powerful and all-good ; but why does 
evil exist? If Jehovah exist and be all-powerful, he does not wish to prevent 
evil, and therefore he cannot be good ; or if he be good, he cannot prevent evil, 
and therefore is not all-powerful. f 

* See Appendix, Note 7. 

tThe Bible says the devil could do no evil without Jehovah's permission. 1 K.XXII. 
22; Job I. 12; II. G ; XII. 16; Ezek. XIV. 9 ; Mat. VIII. 31 ; 2 Thess. 11.11; Judges 
IX. 23. 



NATURE OF THE DEITY. 



XLIII. Jehovali is represented in the Bible as a being m the human shape, a 
visitor and guest Willi men, oftentimes unjust, cruel, vindictive, deceitful, igno- 
rant and repentant. 

Moses says, (G-en. I. 26, 27), man was created in God's "image" and "like- 
ness." It is evident (Gen. III. 22) that man's mental powers were not consid- 
ered to be like those of Jehovah until after the fall — if they were so then. The 
common belief of ancient times was that the gods had bodies like men. If 
Moses had desired to contradict this idea, he would have done so in express 
terms, and not have used such a word as " image," never applied to mental, but 
always to physical likeness. 

Jehovah walked in the garden in the cool of the day. Gen. III. 8. 

" The Lord smelled a sweet savor." Gen. Till. 21. 

"The Lord came down to see the city and tower " of Babel. Gen. XI. 5. 

The Lord appeared to Abraham. Gen. XII. 7 ; XTIII. 1. 

Jehovah ate butter, veal and milk. Gen. XTIII. 8. 

Jehovah stood at the top of Jacob's ladder. Gen. XXVIII. 13. 

Jacob saw " God, face to face." Gen. XXXII. 24-30. 

" God went up from him [Jacob] in the place where he talked with him." 
Gen. XXXT. 13. 

God spoke with a voice. Ex. III. 2. 

" Then went up Moses and Aaron, Nadab aud Abihu, and seventy of the 
elders of Israel; and they saw the God of Israel; and there was under his feet 
as it were a paved work of sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in 
its clearness, and upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand. 
Also they saw God and did eat and drink." Ex. XXIT. 9-11. 

"The Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend." 
Ex. XXXIII. 11. 

The Lord said unto Moses, "And I will take away mine hand, and thou 
shait see my back parts." Ex. XXXIII. 23. 



sec. xliii.] jehovah's visit to Abraham. 105 

There arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord 
knew face to face. Deut. XXXIV. 10. 

The Lord appeared twice unto Solomon. 1 K. XL 9. 

Jehovah had particular days for receiving company. Job. I. 6 ; II. 1. 

He also had particular angels to wait upon his person. Luke I. 19. 

Jehovah said to himself, " Go to, let us go down and confound their [the 
Babelites] language." Gen. XL 7. 

" And the Lord went his way as soon as he had left communing with Abra- 
ham." Gen. XVIII. 33. 

Palfrey* speaks as follows of the narrative in the eighteenth chapter of 
Genesis : 

"Jehovah journeying like an opulent traveller with two attendants, approaches 
Abraham's tent in the heat of noon, and accepts his hospitable offers of water 
for his feet, and refreshment for his hunger. In recompense of this entertain- 
ment, he makes a promise to his attentive hosts of that blessing on which their 
hearts are most set, while he rebukes Sarah for her incredulity and the inde- 
corous levity of its expression. The interview over, he proceeds on his way 
towards Sodom, and tells Abraham, who has respectfully accompanied him, 
that his purpose is to see wiiether tidings which have been brought to him of 
the iniquity of that place, are well founded. Like an obliged and grateful guest, 
he listens patiently, as they walk, to Abraham's solicitations for mercy for his 
neighbors. He sends his servants forward to make the scrutiny on which he 
is intent; and the truth of the unfavorable reports being ascertained by their 
experience, he proceeds to the accomplishment of his work of vengeance, sparing 
only the family in which his messengers had found safety and protection. "What 
intelligent friend to the Divine Mission of Moses will be prepared to say that 
such views of God and of his agency as are presented in these particulars, were 
set down by him as just representations?" Compare this eighteenth chapter of 
Genesis with the fourteenth chapter of IS umbers, which Palfrey says was in- 
spired. 

Jehovah' is represented in the Bible as cruel and bloodthirsty. 

The Lord hath sworn that he will have war with Amalek from generation to 
generation. Gen. XVII. 16. 

He slew 500,000 men of Israel. 2 Ch. XIII. 15-17. 

He sent a pestilence to destroy 70,000 Israelites. 1 Ch. XXI. 15. 

He vexed Israel with all adversity. 2 Ch. XV. 6. 

He punished his true prophet for being innocently deceived, and permitted 
the deceiver to go unharmed. 1 K. XIII. 1-25. 

* Lectures on Jewish Antiquities. Lee. XXIII. 



10G NATURE OF THE DEITY. [SEC. XLIII. 

He directed the Jews to slay all the Midianite prisoners, except the virgins, 
who were to be kept as concubines and slaves. Num. XXXI. 3, 17, 18. 

The Samaritan women with child should be ripped up. Hosea XIII. 10. 

Jehovah destroyed sn in one night. 2 K. XIX. 35 

He ordered the heads of the people to be hung in the sun. Num. XXV. 4. 

lie slew 50,070 Bethshemites for innocently looking into the ark. 2 S. VI. 19. 

He smote Uzzah for piously putting up his hand to save the ark from falling. 
2 S. VI. 6, 7. 

He Inflicts punishment on the third and fourth generation. Deut. V. 9 ; 
Num. XIV. IS; Ex. XX. 5; XXXI V. 7. 

He will send a strong delusion to make men believe a lie. 2 Thess. II. 11. 

The Old Testament represents the ];< tial. See Sec. LIV. 

The Bible represents the ' ignorant and weak. 

Jehovah tried to find out what was in Hezekiah's heart, 'i Ch. XXXII. 31. 

He sent to have the length and breadth of Jerusalem measured with a tape. 
Zech. II. 2. 

He went to Balaam for information. Num. XXII. 9. 

He inquired for information. 2 Ch. XVIII. 19. 

He could not conquer chariots with scythes. Jud. 1. 17. 

The Father of the Universe is depicted in the Hebrew Scriptures as changeable 
am I frequently repentant. 

In the fourteenth chapter of Numbers there is a notable instance in which 
Jehovah was persuaded to change his mind by Moses, and the eighteenth 
chapter of Genesis contains a similar story. 

It grieved the Lord at his heart, and it repented him that he had made man. 
Gen. VI. 6, 7. 

" The Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people." Ex. 
XXXII. 12, 14. 

Jehovah wavered in his intention. Num. XXXIII. 55, 

He repented having make Saul king. 1 S. XV. 10, 11, 35. He had previously 
given Saul another heart and promised to be with him. 1 S. X . 

The Lord repented of the evil he was about to do to Jerusalem. 2 S. XXIV. 
1G. 

He was grieved for the misery inflicted by hims< If on Israel. Jud. X. 10. 

He repented i fthe evil he had done to Israel. 1 Ch. XXI. 14, 15. 

He repented of the evil he was about to do to Israel. Jer. XXVI. 13. 

He repented or would repent, James VI. 16, 17; Joel II. 13; Mieah VII. 
18; Jonah III. 1"; Jer. IV. 28; XVIII. IS; Zech. VIII. 14. 

Jehovah is tritme. 

The New Testament is said, by ninety-nine out of a hundred Christians, i< 



SEC. XLITI.] THREE ARE ONE. 107 

teach that God, the only Deity, is one, but is composed of three person?. These 
three persons are distinct individuals and can act separately from each other. 
The Virgin Mary was impregnated by the Holy Ghost, (Mat. I. IS; Luke I. 
35), and the child conceived was the Sou. In the acts of impregnation and 
conception, the second and third persons of the Godhead acted separately from 
the Father, and from each other. What the Father was doing in the meantime 
is not stated. The Son was so far independent of the Father that he was not 
so much in favor with the latter at one time m at another: (Luke II. 40, 52). 
The desires of the first and third members of the Divine firm did not always 
agree. The junior partner said, on one occasion, " Father, if thou be willing, 
remove this cup from me ; nevertheless, not my will, but thine be done." (Luke 
XXII. 42). Indeed he frequently used expressions to show that their purposes 
did not always coincide. (John V. 30 ; VI. 39 ; Mat. VII. 21 j XII. 50). The 
Father seems to have been even too indifferent to the feelings of the Son, and 
the latter, in the bitter agonies of the cross, cried out, reproachfully, "My God, 
my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Mark XV. 34). And yet these three 
persons are not three persons, but only one. They are the tri-une, the three-m- 
one God of orthodox Christians, who though they believe in the Trinity, though 
they assert that belief in the Trinity is necessary to eternal salvation, though 
they refuse to have any religious fellowship with all who do not acknowledge 
the Trinity, yet do not pretend to defend that Trinity by reason. They 
boldly confess that the Trinity is incomprehensible, and, to the natural reason, 
absurd. But they say it is "a mystery," one of the sacred mysteries, it is be- 
yond reason, and must be accepted without argument. 

" And how do T know that it is a mystery ?" 

" The priest says so." 

" Then the priest can tell me any absurd story and say it is a mystery, and I 
must forthwith believe it; and the more absurd the story, the greater the 
mystery." 

Mystery in revealed religion is only another word for absurdity. The Church 
says there are mysteries in science and natural religion — but it is not so. There 
are many unexplained problems, but no mysteries, in the sense of that word as 
used in regard to the peculiar doctrines of the Christians. 



THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL. 



XLIV. One of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity is, that man's soul 
is immortal. The mind or soul is "the mental strength," * or all the psycho- 
logical endowments of an animal, including the faculties of consciousness, 
sensation, reason, memory, desire, will, and the power of harmoniously govern- 
ing the actions of the muscles. The mind is the function of the brain. The 
animal body is formed of various organs, such as muscles, bones, nerves, 
brain, heart, stomach, liver, kidneys, eyes, ears, nose, palate, &c. ; and 
all of these again are composed of subordinate organs. Every organ has 
a function. Sight is the function of the eyes, taste of the palate, digestion 
of the stomach, and mind is the function of the brain. A function is necessarily 
immaterial. No man has ever cut out a piece of flesh from the human stomach 
and proved it to be digestion, neither has any man seen the function of sight, 
or the strength of a muscle. All search for a material mind is in vain. 

That the mind is a function is a well established fact of physiology. t 
Different faculties of the mind have their seats in different portions of the 
brain. If the back part of the brain (the cerebellum) be destroyed, the animal 
cannot stand ; if the upper and forward part of the brain (the cerebrum) be 
destroyed, the faculties of reason and memory are lost. If the stomach be 
injured, the digestive faculty is impaired — if the brain be injured, the thinking 
faculty will be disordered. The man who gets drunk in his body is drunk in 
his mind, too : he loses the clearness of his ideas. While the brain is soft in 
extreme youth, the mind is weak ; with old age, the brain frequently decreases 
in size and solidity, and second childhood comes on. The existence, as well as 
the vigor of the function, dies with the organ. Digestion ceases to exist with 
the stomach ; there is no sight after the destruction of the eye ; there is no 
mind after the brain dies. 

Man is an animal. He has the same physical organs, and these organs 
have the same functions, as those of other animals. His flesh and his 

* Webster's definition. t See Appendix, Note 8. 



SEC. XLIV.] MAN AX ANIMAL. 100 

blood and his brain are constituted of the same materials, and in precisely 
the same method. The man is apparently far superior in hisorganization 
and capacities to the clog; but the dog is quite as much superior to the 
frog as the man is above the dog. The inferiority of many of the higher 
order of brutes is not to be attributed only to natural mental inferiority,— per- 
haps less to that cause than to the want of an articulate voice ana of hands. A 
man who should grow up among orang-outangs, without ever seeing any of his 
own kind, would be little better than a brute ; and yet he would be no worse 
than a race of animal? possessing all the qualities of man except the articulate 
voice, the hand fitted for grasping, and the erect stature. If man has an 
immortal soul, the dog must have the same. 



THE MORAL ACCOUNTABILITY OF MAN TO LIIS 
CREATOR. 



XLV. The New Testament asserts, indirectly if not directly, that man is 
morally responsible to God for his actions. In other words, the Creator gives 
his creature certain propensities, and then rewards and punishes him for acting 
in obedience to them, Different men have different mental constitutions : one 
is by nature more disposed to be foolish and sinful than another, but Christ 
would hold them all equally responsible. No man can change his mental con- 
stitution ; no amount of wishing, or striving, or praying, will make a brave 
man out of a great coward, or a wise man out of a great fool, or a high-minded 
man out of a very base one. Neither can man govern the cii es in 

which he is placed ; time and tide will have their course in spite of all his 
exertions. Natural mental constitution and outward circumstances, both 
beyond his control, govern him, determine his action, suggest the motives 
according to which he must act. Man is the slave of motives. He never acts 
without motives; he cannot act contrary to the motives which appear the 
strongest to him. He, who feels very hungry, and has a palateable dish within 
his reach, and has no motive for not eating then and there, must eat, as a mat 



1L0 MORAL ACCOUNTABILITY. [SEC. XLT- 

ter of necessity.. Men cannot create motives, at their will, and therefore cannot 
be morally tree or responsible to a creator,. The purpose of all action is self- 
gratification ; the most magnanimous as well as the meanest of all deeds can, 
have but one end— the gratification of the actor. From no point in which the. 
question can be viewed, . does it appear that man should be. punished or 
rewarded for the moral nature of his actions. There may be a personal, con- 
scious Deity,, but he knows no such distinctions as virtue and vice*. All men. 
are as he made them, and equally good before him.* Christ holds men respon- 
sible, not only for their actions, but also for ^heir opinions in. matters of 
religion ;. as though belief were under the control of the will, and were a matter 
of merit. According to Christian doctrine a man should desire,, not to learn, 
the truth,, but to believe the te?iets of : tne orthodox church, just as they are,. 
But if such a desire were proper,, would it be possible for. the mind to be gov- 
erned, in its- conclusions,, by the desire? Can any man believe that black is. 
white, that fresh grass is red,, merely because he knows that such a belief' 
would be rewarded ; by some gseat good $ Man believes in accordance with the- 
evidence, o^ his views of the evidence,, before him. Mian cannot make- 
evidence by wishing, cannot believe without evidence,, and therefore he cannot: 
govern his bel'ef according to his desire. B'afc it he could, it would not be 
consistent with our ideas of human > much- less of divine justice, to hold him, 
responsible lor his roligious opinions^ Men ordinarily follow the creed o£ 
their parents, and desire to do so, The children of the Bramins, Mohamme- 
dans, Buddhists,. Confucianists, Parsees, Jews, Greeks, Catholics, Frotes&mts, 
Skeptics, and Mormons,. almost invariably follow the respective religious creeds 
of their fathers j, and. all consider themselves most fortunate in being placed, ii?. 
a situation to learn, what appears to them to be, the only true religion. 

* See Appendix, Nqte. a0> 



IMMEDIATE DITINB G-OTERXMENT 



XLVI. The Old Testament represents nearly every occurrence as the imme- 
diate act of Jehcvaii, who, according to the old Hebrew doctrine, governed Ibe 
universe without the intervention of any general laws. Ke made contracts 
with Abraham, wrestled witb.Jacoh, and advised with Moses. He came down 
from heaven to examine into the sins of Adam, Babel, and" Sodom. He repeat- 
edly led the armies of Israel to the ibattle?field. He slew the Amalekites with 
.stones from heaven, and he ■stepped the sun in its course, to permit Joshua to 
-destroy the fugitive Gentiles, When. Job is smitten, it is not without a previous 
^consultation on the subject, between the .Lord of Heaven and Satan; and when 
Pharoah obstinately refuses to permit tfce Jews to depart, he acts not from 
natural stubbornness or blindness, but beeause Jehovah had hardened his 
4ieart for that special occasion. Even women could not become .pregnant, on 
snany occasions, without the immediate intervention of the God of Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob/* 

These interpositions do not take place now ; and, as it would be foolish to 
Relieve that a Supreme Deity wonld.eha.nge .his -system of .government, we must 
believe that there never were such interventions. The authority of Moses is 
worth nothing ©n this point.; he only gave expression to the superstition almost 
universally prevalent in ancient times. Eiolihorn -says, ■" According to the 
langinge of this book, [the Pentateuch] God produces everything direeily, 
without availing himself of the course of nature and certain intermediate causes. 
But in this there is nothing peculiar to it Its conceptions are only like those 
of the ancient world in general, when it-had not *&een ascertained by long con- 
tinued inquiry that all events are connected into a scries of intermediate causes." 
Grote remarks, "The perpetual junction of gods and men, in the same picture, 
:and familiar appeal to ever-present divine agency, was in -harmony with ■. he 
■interpretation of nature'' universal in early ages.-f 

* See Gen. XX. 18; XXV. 21; XXIV. 1 ; XXIX. 81 ; XXX. IT, 22; XXXI 11, 12; 
Jfctd. XIII. 2 ; IS. I. IT ; IV. 11 , 2 K. IV. %Q; Ruth IV. 13 ; Luke L 15. 
See A^ppeadix, No.te.'i. 



THE SCHEME OF EEDEMPTTON. 



XLVII. The Christian doctrine is, that Christ came to enable men, by 
believing on him, to enjoy everlasting delights in Heaven. Men were originally 
created immortal, sinless, perfectly happy, and ignorant of the difference 
between right and wrong. While in that condition man violated a command of 
his Creator, and he and his posterity forever were in punishment made mortal, 
sinful, miserable on this earth, and condemned to everlasting pains in a future 
life. The race existed for two thousand and four hundred years almost without 
revelation or aid from God, till the publication of the books of Moses, and these 
were given only to the tribe of Israel. The Jews apparently could be saved by 
their faith, (Rom. IV. 2 ; Gal. III. 6 ; James II. 21, 23 ; Luke XVI 22) ; but 
all the rest of mankind were doomed to hopeless and everlasting damnation. 
After fifteen hundred years, God sent Jesus, a portion of himself, to earth, to 
atone by his sufferings for the sin of Adam. Jesus was conceived by a mar- 
riageable woman, who was distinguishable in no natural aud important point 
from other women of her age and country. He was carried in the womb and 
born and bred like other children. He was possessed of a body of real flesh 
and blood, he was subject to animal wants and desires, and he was fed upon the 
ordinary food of men. He was circumcised, and he grew in form and spirit to 
be a man, (Luke II. 40 ; Mat. XI. 19). He was bred to the trade of a carpen- 
ter, (Mark VI. 3), and he was supposed by his acquaintances to be the son of 
Joseph, (Luke II. 41, 48 ; IV. 22), and to be a man like other men. He made 
no claim to be anything more till he was thirty years of age, (Luke III. 23 ; IV. 
24; Mat. XIII. 54; Mark VI. 1 ; John VI. 42); nor did he, previous to that 
time, utter a sentence worthy of record. On one occasion his relatives thought 
him to be crazy, (Mark III. 21, 31). At the age of thirty he proclaimed himself 
a prophet, but foucd so little faith at home that he declared "a prophet is not 
without honor but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his 
own house.' , (Mark VI. 4 ; Mat. XIII. 57 ; John IV. 44). He was then looked 
upon at home as an impostor ! Not even his own brothers believed on 
him (John VII. 5) ; and they appear to have cared little about him, for they 



SEC. XL VII. J EXECUTION OF A GOD ! 113 

are not mentioned as having been present at his seizure, trial, execution, 
or resurrection. After his mother had given birth to the Divine Redeemer of 
men, she yielded to the embraces of a man and had children — meiely human 
sons and daughters. (Mat. I. 25 ; XII. 10 ; XIII. 55 ; Luke VIII. 19 ; John II. 
12 ; Acts I. 14). After teaching three years, and before he had committed his 
doctrine to writing, Jesus was arrested on a charge of sedition, tried and exe- 
cuted ; and he, God, died in the midst of great torments. Verily, as Paul says, 
such things are "foolishness to the natural man." 



CONTRADICTORY DOCTRINES. 



XLVIII. Two contradictory doctrines cannot both be true ; and no book on 
earth teaches so many conflicting dogmas as the Bible. Moses says there are 
no future rewards and punishments, no future life, and no devil ; he teaches 
the existence of one single God who should be worshipped by only one nation 
with peculiar ceremonies — among which sacrifice was prominent — under the 
ministration of a hereditary caste of priests. The Christian Evangelists teach a 
future life and future rewards and punishments, a God who is three in one, to 
be worshipped by all nations, without sacrifice, and without the interven- 
tion of a hereditary priesthood. It is a notorious fact that texts can be 
found in the Bible to prove anything. A large number of Christian sects, 
differing very widely in their doctrines, all pretend to find the foundation of 
their faith and the condemnation of that of their rivals in this one book. They 
dispute whether God be one or three, whether Christ was a man or a God ; 
whether, at the Sacrament of the last suppar, the communicants eat and drink 
the flesh and blood of Christ, or only the apparent bread and wine; whether 
men can be saved by faith, or by works, or by grace ; whether sinners and un- 
believers will be punished by everlasting pains in hell ; whether there be a tem- 
porary hell into which sinners are thrown after death ; whether the Tope of 
Rome has the authority of Christ to act as the Vicegerent of God on earth; 
whether the priests hare the authority to pardon sins and to condemn men to 



114 CONTRADICTORY DOCTRINES. [SEC. XLVIII. 

hell; whether there be any priests with authority from Christ; whether kings 
and masters have a divine right to rule their subjects and slaves ; whether bap- 
tism be necessary to salvation ; whether true believers possess the power of 
working miracles; whether all the books of the Bible be inspired ; and whether 
the inspiration extend to every word or to the ideas. Let us take up some of 
the most glaring of the contradictions. 



IMMOETALITY OF THE SOUL. 



XLIX. The immortality of the soul is one of the chief points of Christ's 
teaching (Mat. XIX. 16, 17 ; XXII. 30, 37, 39 ; Mark X. 17, 21 ; Luke X. 27, 
2S; XX. 36; John III. 15). In the fifteenth chapter of 1 Corinthians, Paul 
holds a lengthy discourse on eternal life. The sanctions of morality — the re- 
wards for the deserving and the punishments for the wicked — are all confined 
according to the New Testament, to the next world. Everlasting and intense 
delight in Heaven, or pain in Hell, is to be the portion of every man according 
to his deeds on earth, and surely that sanction should be enough. The Evan- 
gelists in no place promise pleasure in this world to the followers of Christ, or 
threaten earthly punishment to sinners. On the contrary, the Lord is repre- 
sented as treating all alike in this world. " He maketh his sun to rise on the 
evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust" (Mat. V. 
45). " He is kind to the unthankful and to the evil." (Luke VI, 28). 

The Old Testament teaches that the soul dies with the body. A few texts 
may be found to show that the doctrine of the life of the soul after the death of 
the body was not unknown, but the weight of authority is all against a resurrec- 
tion. The silence of Moses in the law in regard to the immortality, is equiva- 
lent to an express denial of it. He represents Jehovah as saying that man shall 
return to the dust whence he came, (Gen. II. 19), and shall not "live forever." 
No exception is made for the soul. Solomon, the wisest of all men, gifted with 
oven superhuman wisdom (1 K. III. 11), asserts (Ec. I. 4), that man passes 
away, " but the earth abidcth forever;" and again he says, man dies like a beast, 



SEC. XLIX.J MOSES TAUGHT XO FUTURE LIFE. 115 

(Ee. III. 19, 20); and elsewhere he uses the emphatic language, " the living* 
know that they shall die ,- but the dead know not anything, neither have they 
any more a reward ; for the memory of tbem is forgotten. Also their love and 
their hatred and their envy is now perished : neither have they any more a 
portion forever in anything that is done under the sun. Go thy way, eat thy 
bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; for God now accepteth 
thy works. Let thy garments be always white ; and let thy head lack no oint- 
ment. Live joyfully with thy wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of 
thy vanity; for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labor which thou 
takest under the sun. What soever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy 
might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in the 
grave whither thou goest." Job is not so emphatic, but his denial of the resur- 
rection is equally clear: (VII. 9; XIV. 7,12; XIX. 26; XXL 32). David is 
nearly as plain as Solomon, (Ps. LXXXIX. 48; CII. 11, 12). Isaiah was of the 
same opinion, (XXXIX. 7, 8). 

The Old Testament prescribed a minute code of things to be done, and things 
to be avoided; the disobedient were threatened with severe punishments, and 
the faithful encouraged with the promise of great rewards, but all these rewards 
and punishments were to be administered on this earth. Adam's sin was to be 
punished in this world only. The punishment of Cain was to be that the earth 
should not yield her strength to his tillage. (Gen. IV. 12). The wickedness of 
the Antediluvians was so great that "it repented the Lord that he had made 
man on the earth, and it grieved him at heart ;" yet there is no mention of any 
punishment except the flood, (Gen. VI. 18), Ham's unlucky eyes were damned 
by Xoah, with Jehovah's consent, in the condemnation of himself and all his 
descendants to slavery on this earth. (Gen. IX. 25). The people of Sodom 
were struck with blindness and destroyed with " brimstone and fire/' (Gem 
XIX. 11, 24, 85). Abraham's willingness to obey the Lord was to be rewarded 
on earth by the increase of his posterity to be a great nation, with Jehovah for 
their God and protection. Xo mention is made of reward in Heaven, (Gen. 
XXII. 17). The idea affinal settlement with man for all his sins and virtues, 
before he leaves this world, is particularly strong with Moses, and is set forth 
with great force in the beginning of Deuteronomy. Chapter seventh contains the 
words of Jehovah conveying assurance to the Jews that obedience to the law of 
Moses would be rewarded by the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham, (Gen. 
XVII. e, 7 ">, and disobedience should be punished with destruction. In chapter 
twenty-eighth of Deuteronomy, there is a long enumeration of the blessings 
which Jehovah will bestow upon the Israelites if they shall be true to him, and 
of the evils which he will inflict if they turn away and neglect his laws and 
ordinances. The blessings promised are all kinds of earthly prosperity, and 



116 CONTRADICTORY DOCTRINES. [SEC. XLIX. 

the long list concludes thus : " the Lord shall make thee plenteous in goods, in 
the fruit of thy body, and in the fruit of thy cattle, and in the fruit of thy ground, 
in the land which the Lord sware unto thy fathers to give thee." The evils 
threatened for disobedience are the sword, famine, pestilence, " madness, and 
blindness, and astonishment of heart," consumption, fever, inflammation, ex- 
treme burning, blasting, mildew, all the diseases of Egypt, trembling of heart, 
failing of eyes, sorrow of mind, renewed captivity in Egypt; and, finally, "the 
Lord shall send upon thee cursing, vexation and rebuke, in all that thou settest 
thine hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed." Not a word of Heaven or 
Hell ! It is very clear that Moses was determined not to patronize those insti- 
tutions. See, likewise, Lev. XXYJ. 3, 4, 15-17 ; Ex. XX. 12 ; Ps. LVIII. 11. 

No Christian author worthy of note, contends that a future life was taught 
by the Old Testament. * Milman sa^'s that Moses was acquainted with the 
doctrine of the immortality of the soul, but he did not teach it, because it was 
received among the Egyptians, and because he wished to make his law differ as 
much as possible from that of the Egyptians. This is the only excuse offered 
for Moses, and much worse than none at all. 



THE MYTH OF PABADISE AND ADAM'S SIN. 



L. The author of the Pentateuch, in giving an account of the early history of 
mankind, thought proper to introduce the myth prevalent among all the ancient 
nations of western Asia, of a golden age when the earth and nature were incon- 
ceivably beautiful, when the w.ole animal creation was at peace, when men 
were free from pain and death, satisfied in every want and gratified in every 
desire without exertion, and periectiy happ}' and sinless and even ignorant of 
the distinction between right and wrong. The present condition of man is 
accounted for b}' supposing that he violated a command of Jehovah, and for 
that reason was rendered sinful and mortal, liable to disease and paiu, and 
compelled to livo in misery, and to earn his support by his labor. No idea of 

* Note to the XVth Chapter of Gibbon's Decline and Fall. 



SEC. L.] THE PENALTY OF ADAM*S SIX? 117 

punishment in a future life was affixed to Adam's sin, nor is there any hint in 
any of the writings of the Hebrew prophets that his guilt was to be expiated 
after death. 

In the time of Jesus, the doctrine of the immortality of the soul was adopted 
by the majority of the people in Judea, and was firmly rooted among that class 
in which he hoped to make the most of his converts. Another doctrine had 
also some prevalence — that man was born wicked, that he was naturally sinful. 
Christ and his followers connected these two doctrines with the myth of the 
fall, tj which a new interpretation was given. The chief punishment of Adam 
was not as represented by Moses, but was the condemnation of all men to hell, 
from which they could be rescued only by believing on Jesus Christ. 



THE ONENESS OF GOD. 



LT. The Deity is considered throughout the Old Testament as a unit, and as 
single in his nature. He is generally styled Jehovah ; he is sometimes called 
the " Father," but never the "Son," and the Holy Ghost is never referred to as 
a distinct personage. (Deut. IV. 35, 39 ; V. 7 ; VI. 4 ; VIII. IS ; XXXII. 39 : 
Ex. XX. 3 ; Ps. LXXXVI. 10; Is. XXXVII. 16; XLIII. 10; XLIV. 6; XLV. 
5 ; Jer. X. 10). 

The New Testament has always been interpreted by the great majority of 
Christians to teach that God is not single but three persons in one, composed 
of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The followiug texts are relied on 
by the Trinitarians: Mat. III. 16, XVII. 5, XXVIII. 19 ; Luke I. 35 ; John V. 
IS ; XIV. 16, 26 ; XV. 26 ; XVI. 13 ; 1 John V. 7 ; 2 Cor. XIII. 14. Christ 
is said to be the maker and preserver of all things, John I. 3, 10 ; Heb. I. 2, 1" ; 
1 Cor. VIII. 6; Col. I. 16; Rev. IV. 11. Christ is one substance with God, 
John X. 30, 38 ; XII. 45 ; XVII. 11, 22 ; XIV. 9. Christ is the God of Gods, 
Rom XIV. 9; Phil. II. 9; Col. II. 10, 15; 1 Pet. III. 22; Rev. XVII. 14; 
XIX. 10. The Holy Ghost is spoken of as a distinct personage, Mat. III. 16 ; 
Mark I. 10 ; Luke III. 22; John I. 32. 



MEANS OF ATTAINING DIVINE FAVOR. 



LIT. The only passport to divine favor recognised by the Old Testament 
writers was descent from Jacob ; but the Christians asserted that there was no 
means of salvation except by the faith of Christ. In many passages of the New 
Testament it is pointedly asserted that belief in Jesus as the Redeemer of man- 
kind is the only means of escaping from eternal hell, (John VI. 40, 47 ; X. 28 ; 
XT. 26 ; XVII. 3; XX. 31. Acts. II. 38 ; XVI. 31. Rom. 1. 17 ; X. 9 ; XIV. 
23. 1 John IV. 2, 6, 15; V. 1, 13). Mark is rather positive when he says 
(XVI. 16), "He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved, but he that be° 
lieveth not shall be dammed." 

In other passages it is said that love is the fulfilment of. the law, or that sal- 
vation may be attained by good works, (Mat. V. 44, 45 . XVI. 27; XXII. 37, 
39, 40 ; Mark XII. 31 ; Luke X. 27, 28 ; XVIII. 22 ; Rom. XIII. 8, 10 ; 1 John 
IV. 7, 16). 

Elsewhere it is intimated that neither faith nor works will suffice to wash 
out the sin of Adam, but that only the grace [or caprice] of God can suffice 
(Mat XX. 15 : Luke XVII. 35 ; John VI. 27 ; Acts II. 23 ; VIII. 16 ; XV. 11 ; 
Bom. II. 4 ; X. 3 ; IX. 16 ; 1 Cor. X. 13 ; Eph. II. S ; Phil. II. 13 ; 2 Pet. III. 
15), The term " elect" frequently applied in the New Testament to the favo- 
rites of Heaven conveys the idea that the divine favor cannot be gained by 
anything that man can do. All these dogmas are inconsistent with each other, 
and equally inconsistent with reason. 



THE DEVIL. 



LHI. Moses had no devil; he never hints that there is an evil spirit. His 
history of the temptation and fall show conclusively that he rejected the doc- 
trine of a devil, which was received in Egypt long before his time, as he must 
have known. Eve was tempted by a serpent, " which was more subtle than 
any beast of the field." There is no hint that the devil entered, or took the 
shape of a snake. Jehovah condemns that reptile as though it had been the 
sole sinner, to eat dust, and crawl upon its belly, and be hated and persecuted 
by man for ever. The temptation having caused the greatest evil in the 
history of the universe, according to both Hebrew and Christian writers, it 
follows that Satan must have been the actor, if Moses had been disposed to 
recognise such a personage. 

The devil plays an important figure iu the New Testament 



DIVINE FAVORITISM. 

LTV. The Old Testament, claiming to be a divine revelation, was given to 
the Jews only ; they were assured that they were the especial favorites of Jeho- 
vah ; that he had chosen them, and them alone, to be a holy people before him ; 
that he had no communication with other nations ; and that he would be their 
exclusive God for ever. They were directed to utterly destroy all opposing 
Gentiles ; they were forbidden to intermarry with foreigners ; they weie assured 
that none should ever sit upon their throne, except the tunily of David, and 



120 CONTRADICTORY DOCTRINES. [SEC. LIT. 

that none should ever minister to Jehovah, except descendants of Aaron. The 
peculiar favor of God for Israel is the most prominent of the doctrines of Moses. 
Gen. XVII. 8, 9 ; XVIII. 7 ; XIX. 5 ; XXVII. 29 ; Ex. XI. 7 ; XIX. 6 ; XXIX. 
45, 46 ; XXXV. 84; Deut. IV. 37 ; VII. 6, 36 ; IX. 9 ; XI. 9-18 ; XIV. 2, 21 ; 
XVIII. 5; XXVI. 18, 19; XXXII. 43 ; XXVII. 10; Num. XIV. 40; XXVI. 
1-14; Ps.' XVIII. 19, 20 ; 1 Ch. XVII. 9, 22 ; &c. 

The New Testament denies the superiority of the blood of Abraham, (John 
VIII. 33), and asserts that all nations are alike before God ; (Mat. XXVIII. 1, 
9 ; Mark XVI. 15 ; Luke XXIV. 47 ; Acts XV. 17 ; Rom. III. 22 ; Gal. III. 28 ; 
VI. 15; Eph. I. 10; II. 14; Col. II. 14). Paul declares Jews and Gentiles to 
be alike transgressors (Rom. II. 12; III. 20). 



GENERAL SPIRIT OF THE LAW. 



LV. The general spirit of the New Testament differs greatly from that of 
the Mosaic law. The Christians disregard the Jewish code in relation to cir- 
cumcision, sacrifices, the Sabbath, unclean meats, and exalt the virtues of bap- 
tism, prayer, and humility. The Old Testament is sanguinary in its teachings, 
and unfitted to educate any nation to feelings of charity, love, moderation or 
justice towards the foreigner, the poor or the innovator. The punishment of 
death was decreed for blasphemy, (Lev. XXIV. 23) ; for Sabbath breaking, 
(Num. XV. 32); for idolatry, (Deut. XIII. 6; XVII. 5; Ex. XXII. 20); for 
filial stubbornness, (Deut. XXI. 18), and for adultery, (Deut. XXII. 22). Na- 
tions in the neighborhood of Judea, if idolatrous, were to be destroyed utterly, 
"smiting them with the edge of the sword," " making no covenant with them, 
and showing no mercy to them," unless it were to carry off the virgins for con- 
cubines, after slaying all the males and married women, (Deut. VII. 12; XIII. 
15, 17; Ex. XXXII. 27). 

The following quotations from different books will serve to show something 
of the spirit of the Old Testament: 

" Thy foot may be dipped in the blood of thine enemies, and the tongue of 
thv dogs in the same." Ps. LXVIII. 22. 



SEC. LV.| THE CURSE OF DAVID. 121 

"The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance : he shall wash his 
feet in the blood of the wicked." Ps. LVI1I. 10. 

" Do unto them as unto the Midianites, as to Sisera, as to Javon, at the brook 
of Kison, which perished at Endor ; they became as dung for the earth." Ps. 
LXXXIII. 9. 

" my God, make them like a wheel, as the stubble before the wind, as the 
fire burneth the wood, as the ilame setteth the mountain on fire. So persecute 
them with thy tempest, and make them afraid with thy storm." Ps. LXXXIII. 
13. 

" Let them be confounded and troubled forever ; yea let them be put to 
shame and perish." Ps. LXXXIII. 17. 

" I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour 
flesh." Deut. XXXII. 42. 

"An eye for an eye," and "a tooth for a tooth," (Ex. XXI. 24; Lev. XXIV. 
20) was the rule of conduct toward Jews — but toward Gentiles there was " no 
mercy." 

David, in Psalm CIX., thus hurls his curses at some enemy : 

" Let his days be few; and let auother take his office. 

" Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow. 

" Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg ; let them seek their 
bread also out of their desolate places. 

** Let the extortioner catch all that he hath ; and let the stranger spoil his 
labor. 

" Let there be none to extend mercy unto him ; neither let there be any to 
favor his fatherless children. 

"Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name 
be blotted out." 

Christ repealed the eye-for-an-eye and tooth-for-a-tooth doctrine, and prohib- 
ited revenge, (Mat. V. 44; Luke VI. 28; Acts VII. 60; Rom. XII. 14). He said 
nothing of punishing blasphemers, Sabbath-breakers, idolaters, or stubborn 
sons, in this world, and he directed that the punishment of an adulterer should 
be inflicted only by sinless persons, which was equivalent to saying that the 
Jewish law against adultery should not be executed at all, (John VIII. 11). The 
Jehovah of Moses is a god of battles: the Deity of Paul is a god of peace, ^Rom. 
XV. 33 ; Heb. XIII. 20) ; and yet we are told they are the same God. 

" God is lover 2 Cor. XIII. 11 ; 1 John IV. 8. 

" The Lord is a man of war. 11 Ex. XV. 3. 



PERMANENCE OF THE JEWISH LAW. 



LVI. There are few points in which the Old Testament is clearer than that 
the law of Moses was intended to remain in force forever. When Jehovah 
chose Abraham to be the father of God's people, he vised the following very 
perspicuous words; "I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and 
thy seed after thee^ in their generations, for an everlasting covenant j to be a 
God unto thee and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee and to thy 
seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan for 
an everlasting possession ; and I will be their God/' (Gen. XYIL 7, 8). Whether 
Abraham had a bad memory, or whether the covenant was not of sufficient im- 
portance for him to keep it before his mind, Moses does not say, though he in- 
forms us that Jehovah repeated his promise no less than five different times to 
Abraham. (Gen. XII. 1-8 ; XIII. 14-17; XT. 1-5, 13-21 ; XVII. 1-8; XXII. 
15-18). To Isaac the promise was renewed but once, (Gen. XXVI. 2-5), 
and to Jacob thrice. (Gen. XXVIII. 13-15; XXXV. 10-12; XL VI. 2-3). 
Jehovah did not expresslv state on all these occasions that the covenant should 
last forever, but that was plainly implied. During the time of Moses the Lord 
frequently alluded to the promise, which he "sware unto Abraham and Isaac 
and Jacob;" but when he found out what a stiff-necked race the Jews were, he 
gave them to understand that the contract was mutually binding, and if they 
would not observe their share, he would not only not observe his part, but he 
would give them a hell on earth besides. (Deut. VIII. 20). It was nevertheless 
very plain that he never intended to entirely fulfil his threat, but purposed to 
preserve his law to Israel forever, (Ex. XX. 12; XII. 24; XXIX. 42; XXXI. 
16 ; Deut. VI. 2 ; VII. 0, 16 ; XI. 21 ; XII. 19 ; XVIII. 5 ; XXVI. 19 ; XXVII. 
26; Lev. X. 15; XXIII. 21; Num. XXXV. 29; 1 Ch. XVII. 9-14, 22; 1 K. 
VI. 13; 2 K. XVII. 37; Ps. CV.ll; Mai. IV. 4). The threats against the 
Jews in no place hint a withdrawal or destruction of the Mosaic law, or its 
repeal to make room for an improved code. Moses said, (Deut. XXVII. 26), 
" cursed be the man that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them." 
Eight hundred a*nd fifty years later, after the Jews had committed nearly all 



SEC. LVI.] HEFfeAL OF THfi MOSAIC LAW. 12$ 

their great offences against Jehovah and his law, he said to Jeremiah, (XI. 3}, 
" cursed be the man that obeyeth not the Words of this Covenant.*' Besides the 
numerous promises that the covenant with Abraham should endure forever* 
the only consideration for which — circumcision — was always faithfully observed 
by the Jews, there were numerous promises that minor points of the law should 
be sacred forever. Thus, Levi should minister forever to Jehovah and be his 
heir, (Deut. XII. 19 ; XIV. 27 ; XVIIL 5 ; Num. XVl. 40 ; III. 10). Offerings 
should be made forever, (Ex. 3tXIX. 42). The Mosaic Habbath should be ob= 
served forever, (Ex. %XXL 15-17) ; and the same method for washing, and the 
same kind of oil for ointment should be used for ever. (Ex, XXX. 21, 31). 

The publication of the New Testament as a divine revelation was an abroga* 
tion of the law or Moses. The two systems are at the extremes of all known 
religious codes for mildness and severity. It is impossible to reconcile them* 
and no author has attempted to do so> The declaration of Jesus that he came 
to fulfil the Mosaic law, to every "jot* 1 and "tittle/* (Mat. V. 17, 18), amounts 
to nothing, when we know that nearly all his acts Were in defiance of that law-. 
The Baptist, who was inspired, (Mat. III. 10; Luke HI. 9), said, (Luke VIL 
28,) that the axe was to be laid at the root of "every tree which briugeth not 
forth good fruit," and the tree specially referred to was the Jewish law. Christ 
ftatly contradicted the Old Testament as to the mortality of ihe soul, the nature 
of God, the superiority of the blood of Abraham, swearing and divorce, but he 
dodged the questions of circumcision, offerings, the Sabbath, and clean meats, 
Wherein the law was violated by his followers, with his approval* 



JESUS A CRIMINAL UNDER THE JEWISH LAW , 



LVII. The Christian philosopher is compelled, in defence of his faith- td 
assert that it is consistent with the attributes of an all-wise, unchangeable and 
perfect God, to publish two different and entirely inconsistent systems of reli- 
gion ; but he would hardly confess th.it if one prophet were legally condemned 
to death under the laws of another, both could have acted by the same divine 
inspiration. The Je\vs claimed that Jesus had forfeited his life by the Mosaic 



124 JESUS A CRIMINAL. [sEC. LVlL 

law ; and if upon examination we find that to be the fact, we must conclude 
that either Jesus or Moses acted without Jehovah's authority. 

Jesus affirmed the divine inspiration of the Pentateuch, (Mat. V. 17, IS; XV. 
4-7; XXII. 31; Mark TIL 0-15; XII. 26; Luke XX. 37; XXIV. 27; John 

v. 4(5). 

Jesus claimed to be divine; (Mat. I. 18; VII. 23; Luke I. 35; Joi.n VIIL 
oS ; X. 30 ; XX. 28 ; CoL IL 2 ; John V. I), 

The claims of Jesus to the Messiahship, to possess the power of forgiving 
sins, and to be divine, left the Jews, and particularly the priests, no half-way 
course to pursue. It was their duty to acknowledge him as a true prophet, or 
to denounce him as an impostor. This would have been their duty if the pre- 
tender had confined his mission to lamenting like Jeremiah, or psalm-singing 
like David, and much more when the prophet proposed to abolish at once the 
laws given by Jehovah himself. When a man assumed the prophetic character 
amoug the Jews, the burden of proof Was upon himself. The people were to 
assume that he was a false prophet, if he did not prove himself to be a true one. 
The Pharisees and Levites were surely not to blame if Jesus did not convince 
them of his divine authority ; and if he failed to so conviuce them, it was their 
duty to punish him as a blasphemer and an impostor. 

It was proper to prove divine authority by miracles. (Num. XVI. 29 ; Ex. 

IV. 1-30; Jud. VL 17 j 2 K. XX. 8-11 ; Is. XXXY1IL 7, 8). 

Christ refused to perform miracles to prove his divine authority when re- 
quested to do so. (Mat. XII. 39; XIII. 58; XYl. 24; Mark VI. 5; Luke XL 
16; John 11.18; YI. 38). 

The Jews were not to receive a prophet on trust, but were required to exa* 
mine into his claims and to judge for themselves. Duut. XVIII. 20-22. 

Prophets Were required to act in the name of the Lord. Deut. XVIII. 20» 

Jesus refused to say in whose name he acted. Luke XX. 8. 

The Mosaic law was given to last for ever. See Sec. LVI. of this book. 

Jesus said, evidently referring to the Jewish law: " Every plant which my 
Heavenly Father hath not planted, must be rooted up." (Mat. XV. 13). And 
he was on friendly terms with John the Baptist, an open enemy to the law of 
Moses. 

Jesus repealed portions of the old law inculcating strict retaliation. (Mat. 

V. 44 ; Luke YI. 28). He repealed the Mosaic law in regard to adultery. 
(Mat. V. 31, 32 ; XIX. 8, 9 ; Mark X. 5-12 ; Luke XYL 18) ; and in regard to 
swearing (Mat, Y. 34; James YI. 12) ; and in regard to resistance to oppres- 
sion (Mat. Y. 39-42). He also taught a new doctrine not authorised by the 
law of Moses in relation to baptism, (Mat, III. 11, 15, &c), aud in regard to 
prayer, (Mat. VII, 7, &c). He frequently exhibited signs of disrespect for the 



SEC. LYII.'j OBEY TIlE LEYITE OR DlE. 125 

old law (Mat XII. 6 ; V. 22-4-1; Mark XII. 29-31 ; Luke V. 21 ; VL 87; XV, 
13; XIX. 9; Rom. XIII. 8, 10; John IV. 23). His whole life and doctrine 
was an assertion of the insufficiency of the Jewish law. 

The Levites were to be the heirs of Jehovah's ministry for ever. Deut» 
XVIII, 5. 

" The man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the 
priest that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God, or unto the 
judge, even that man shall die, and thou shall put away the evil from Israel." 
Deut. XVII. 12. 

" Take heed to thyself that thou forsake not the Levite as long as thou livest 
on the earth." Deut. XII. 19 ; XIV. 27. 

Jesus forsook the Levites ; he denied that they were the heirs of Jehovah's 
ministry, (Mat. IV. 18-21). He spoke of them with habitual disrespect, (Mat. 
V. 20 ; Luke X. 31, 32 ; XVIII. 10). And his whole life was a doing presump- 
tuously toward them, and a refusal to hearken to them. 

Moses said that Jehovah rested on the Sabbath* Gen II. 2. 

Jesus denied it. John V. 17. 

The Old Testament called down curses on " every man that confirmeth not 
all the words of this covenant to do them." Deut XXVII. 26 ; Jer. XL 3. 

Christ did not confirm all the words of that Covenant. 

The man that despised the law of Moses should die, (Heb. X.28). "Ye shall 
hot add unto the word, [the Mosaic law,] which I command you, neither shall ye 
diminish aught from it; that ye shall keep the commandments of the Lord 
your God." Deut. IV. 2. 

Jesus added to and diminished from the Mosaic law. Moses had directed 
that even the performance of miracles should not suffice to convince the Jews 
of the divine authority of any prophet who proposed to lead them to strange 
gods. Deut. XIII. 1-5. 

Jesus did introduce the worship of a strange god ; a divinity entirely diflfe* 
rent from the God of Moses; a worship entirely different from that taught by 
the Old Testament, and a theory of moral duty entirely different from that of 
the Pentateuch. 

Jesus claimed to be the Messias foretold by the prophets, but he was no king. 
John XVIII. 36. 

The Messias foretold by the prophets was to be a king. Is. XIV. 2 ; XXXII* 
1, 18 ; XLV. 14; XLIX. 22; ML 1-4, 21; LX. 3 ; Ezek XXXVI. S ; XXXVII. 
23 ; Dan. VII. 14; IX. 25; Joel. III. 9 ; Jer. III. 17. 

Jesus was a false prophet, and a blasphemer, and a reviler of the Levites, 
within the meaning ol the Mosaic law, and if he did not convince the Israelites 
of his divine mission, it was their duty to punish him as an impostor. 



t26 COVTEADICTORY DOCTKlNT?. [sEC. 

The punishment of the false prophet, the blasphemer and the reviler of the 
Levitts was death. Dent XIII. I-.? : XVIII. 20 : Lev, XXIV. 1 

Jesui was executed by the Jews for his offences against the laws of 1 
and the evidence of his guilt was so strong that no reasonable man can dear 
lob and execution were justified by the law* 



REVIEW OF lyCOXSISTEXCIES. 



LVIII. For ill the? r inconslsteii a 

only one ex I in :. _ in iges of civilization required diffei 

teaching. Archbishop \Vhatelv saya, — Anyone who regards *he Bible. 
5nany Christians do, as tmi fining divine ins without hr 

formed any clear notions of what does, and what does not, belong to each dis- 
pensation, will of course fall into the _ nfusion of thought. He will be 
like a man who should have received from his father-; at various times, a gi 
nojwber of letters containing ditt * J his conduct, from I .hen 
he was a little child just able to read, till he was a grown man ; and who should 
lay by all I h care and reverence, but in a confused heap, and 
should take up any one of them at random, and read : I any reference 
to its date, whenever he needed his father's instructions how to act." The 
.mmedans and Mormons, who adopt all the Scriptures of the Hebrews and 
Christians, would no doubt explain x r inconsistencies of 
their books in the same method. 



PRACTICAL EFFECTS. 



LIX. A divine revelation should be more powerful for good than any mere 4 
human teaching; and the apologists of Christianity assert that its practical 
effects prove its divine origin. They say that civilization and morality have 
kept equal pace with knowledge of, and faith in, the Bible. Only among 
Christians have the arts and sciences reached their highest development; only 
the influence of the Bible has been able to break down the barbarous customs 
of ancient times, which considered every stranger an enemy, and might equiva^ 
lent to right. The truths and promises of the Bible, it is said, the hopes of 
heaven and the fears of hell, have a great and unequalled power in rendering 
man moral, aiding him to subdue his baser passions, inclining him to justice 
and morality, and enabling him to free himself from idol-worship, debasing 
superstitions, and vile propensities. On the other hand, wherever Christianity 
has not prevailed, there public and private morality have been at a low ebb, the 
arts of civilized life have languished, political liberty has disappeared or 
remained unknown, and its place has been occupied by despotism or anarchy. 

Illustrations in support of these assertions are not wanting, The Jews were 
the only people of antiquity who were not worshippers of idols and who pos- 
sessed an exalted idea of the Deity, and a high morality. The Greeks and 
Romans of that early time were polytheists and idol-worshippers, they repre- 
sented their divinities as possessed of the most debased characters, and the 
most disgusting crimes, now not even to be named in respectable society, were 
then publicly practised, almost without reproach, by the most prominent and 
influential men. In our own day, the Bible is better known in England and 
America than in any other lands, and there accordingly are found governments 
more free, arts more flourishing, and people more moral than in any other 
lands. Germany and France, where the Bible is less known, are not so prospe- 
rous, yet they are far in advance of all the pagan nations and of Catholic 
countries, where the people are forbidden to read the Bible, and where the 
popular faith is loaded down with a multitude of superstitions. Sweden and 
Denmark are Protestant countries, and the people are moral. Italy and Spain 



128 CONTRADICTORY DOCTRINES. [SEC. LIX. 

are Catholic, and the people are ignorant and debased. And yet the Turks are 
a grade lower in civilization, being farther removed from the truths of Chris- 
tianity, and still be} r ond them are the Chinese and Hindoos, and in the lowest 
grade of ignorance and debasement are the idolaters of Africa and the Polyne- 
sian Islands. But there is a fearful state to which the superstitious and 
untaught idolator never reaches, the condition of perfect lawlessness and 
immorality, the unbridled reign of all that is basest in man's nature, when a 
nation educated in the truths of Christianity, casts them off and rushes into the 
arms of a heism. Such was France in 1793, drunk on blood to vomit crime, 
the horriblest of horrors, a great nation of divine intelligence, struck with 
atheistic frenzy, denying the distinction between virtue and vice, sending all 
their best men to the guillotine, and elevating their meanest to the summit of 
power, and hurling public order, religion, and morality into one general ruin. 

There are several complete answers to all this : first, civilization and belief 
in the Bible do not keep equal pace ; secondly, if they did, there is no proof 
that the former is the effect of the latter; and thirdly, there is strong evidence 
to show that high enlightenment is generally followed by disbelief in the Bible. 
Let us see whether Jews and Christians in ancient and modern times have been 
much superior to the Gentiles and Skeptics? And first for a comparison be- 
tween the Jews and Greeks — nations w r hich existed about the same time, and 
between w r hich, partial comparisons have frequently been drawn by Christian 
writers. All, or nearly all, that we know, is derived from their own books, and 
on the first examination of these, a notable difference is perceptible. The He- 
brew books are all upon religious or historical subjects, and principally occu- 
pied with devotional ideas, while the writings of the Greeks are upon all 
branches of history, philosophy, the fine arts, and the natural sciences. This 
difference is to be accounted for, partly at least, by the fact that the Jews w r ere 
a priest ridden nation ; all their books were written by priests ; all their 
learning was monopolised by priests ; all their opinions were derived from the 
priests ; and it may well be supposed that a hereditary, despotic, superstitious, 
and corrupt priesthood, would tolerate no light literature. Greece on the other 
hand had no hereditary, powerful or organized priesthood. Everybody could 
write books as well as the priests, and could publish in defiance of them. 

That the Jews were a rude, blood thirsty, violent people, harsh toward each 
other, and illiberal and unjust toward other nations, has sufficiently been shown 
already. Great credit has been claimed for them because of their exalted idea 
of the Deity, as a unity, who was to be worshipped directly in the idea, and not 
indirectly, through idols or natural phenomena : but an examination of the Old 
Testament will show that the Israelites were generally far from pure mono- 
theism. Even the Pentateueh is not free from polytheistic ideas. 



SEC. LIX.] POLYTHEISM AMONG THE JEWS. 12& 

" I know that the Lord [* Jehovah' in the original] is greater than all gods," 
Ex. XVIII. 11. 

" Who rs like arito thee, Lord, [Jehovah j among the gods ?" Ex. XV. 11. 

" Jehovah is a great king above all gods," Ps. XCV. 3. Compare Gen. VI. 
2 ; 1 K. XXII. 19 ■; Job. II. 1-; Ps. XCVII. 7 ; Joshua XXIV. 15 ; Ezek. XX. 
7; XXIII. 3; Lent. XII. 2; XIII. 6, 7; XVII. 3; Ex. XXXII, 1 ; Lev. 
XVII. 7- 

-In all these passages Jehovah is spoken of, as Jupiter might be spoken of 
among the Greeks, implying evidently that he was not the sole divinity. 
Lessing speaks thus of the polytheistic idea in Judea ': — "So far as we can 
learn from the Old Testament, the Israelites before the time of the Babylonish 
captivity had no correct idea of the unity of God. Otherwise toey would not 
have given the same name to the false deities of other lands, and they would 
not have styled Jehovah their God — : the God of their country, and the God of 
their fathers. It is plain that where ne is called the only god, the meaning is 
'-that he was the first, the greatest, the most perfect. He recognised the divini- 
ties of the heathens as gods, and he Claimed to be superior to them in wisdom 
and in power. So long as the Jews found no reason to doubt the superiority 
of their God, so long they were true to him ; but When they saw that another 
people, by the. providence if its God, surpassed themselves in wealth or power, 
just so soon did they go o 5 whoring after the strange gods, * supposed to be 
more powerful. But when the Jews were carried to Babylon, and had their 
minds opened as by a revolution, and saw a nation with a purer idea of mono- 
theism and became more familiar with the wrivings of Moses, th 7 became 
another people, ana were no longer capable of ruuning after strange gods. Ail 
idol-worship was at an end. If this undeniable change in the religious history 
of the Jews is not to be thus explained, then it is inexplicable. They might 
desert a natural divinity, but they could not desert the only God." As for 
polytheism at the present day, there is quite as much of it in the Catholic 
Church as among any heathens. 

The government of the Jews was one of the most despotic and debasing 
which ever existed. A hereditary priesthood, with such influence as the Levites 
possessed, must necessarily keep any nation at a low grade of civilization. The 
system of castes is said by all philosophers, who have observed its influence, to 
be the most damnable invention of tyranny and priestly fraud. It destroys all 
sense of human equality and dignity, and makes the many to be the abject 
slaves of the few. 



* This is a verv expressive figure, and was frequently used by the holy prophets :— 
See Ex XXXIV.^; Lev. XX. 5 ; Deut. XXXI. 16; 2 Ch. XXI. 13 ; Ps. LXXIII. 27; 
Ezek. VI. 9 ; Hosea IV. 12 ; Jud. II. 17. 

5 



130 PRACTICAL EFFECTS. [SEC. LIX* 

The ancient Jews did nothing for our benefit. They left us no liberal or 
well-digested laws ; no valuable essays on political, moral, social, or religious 
philosophy ; no able historical works ; no grammar, no logic, no rhetoric, no 
great orations, no epics, no tragedies, no comedies, no mathematics, no astro- 
nomy, no geography, no mechanical inventions, no great architectural monu- 
ments, no statues, no pictures, not even the glory of a great empire. All the 
peculiar favor of Jehovah, all the miracles, all the prophets with their reve- 
lations from heaven did not enable the Jews to rival the unassisted human 
energy and ability of neighboring heathen nations. Voltaire * remarks : — 
" Moses changes his ring, before the king, into a serpent, and all the waters of 
the kingdom into blood ; he creates toads which cover the earth ; he changes 
the dust into lice; he fills the air with winged poisonous insects; he strikes all 
the men and all the animals of the land with frightful ulcers ; he calls down 
storms, hail, and the thunder-bolts to ruin the country; he covers it with 
grasshoppers ; he plunges it into the deepest night for three successive days ; 
he cuts off the first born of animals and men, beginning with the heir of the 
throne ; he passes dry-shod over the bed of the Red Sea, while the waters stand 
heaped up in mountains on either hand, and after his passage they rush down 
and overwhelm the army of Pharoah. After reading of all these miracles, the 
thinking man says, surely the nation for which and by which such wonders are 
done, is destined to be the master of the universe ! But no ! They end by 
suffering famine and misery in and sands, and after prodigy upon prodigy they 
all die before seeing the little corner of earth where their descendants were 
established for a few years." 

The Greeks were far less numerous than the descendants of Jacob, [if the 
numbers given by Moses be correct,] and yet how much do we not owe to 
Greek civilization ? It might almost be said that we owe everything to them. 
" The beginnings! of all our intellectual civilization, of our poetry, music, 
history, oratory, sculpture, painting and architecture, of our logical, metaphys- 
ical, ethical, political, mathematical and physical science, and of our free poli- 
tical institutions must be traced to the Greeks. They are pre-eminently the 
aristocracy oi the human race. No other nation can ever do for mankind what 
they did. They found the world immersed in all the darkness of of the oriental 
form of society. Despotic governments enforcing abject submission to the 
sovereign, and a prohibition of open discussion in assemblies of chiefs or 
counsellors; exclusive [and hereditary] priesthoods predominating over the 
people • in private life polygamy ; cruel punishments and bodily mutilations ; 
art massive, shapeless and grotesque ; the absence of all literature worthy of 
^he name; no science, no oratory, no drama ; no history beyond a meagre chro- 

* Essay on Miuacles. t Edinburgh Review, January, 1860. 



SEC. LIX.] THE GREEK PROMETHEUS. 131 

nicle of the genealogies and acts of the kings; — such was the state of the most 
civilized portion of mankind when the influence of Greek genius began to 
operate upon the inert mass. It was this which first infused a soul into a lifeless 
body — it was the Greek Prometheus who stole from Heaven the fire which 
illuminated and warmed these benighted races ; and it was under its excite- 
ment that they made the first great step out of the stationary into the progress- 
ive state; that step of which all experience proves the extreme difficulty, even 
where there is a model at hand to work upon." Not only did the Greeks lay 
the foundations of all our present intellectual culture, but they carried many of 
the highest branches of the arts to an excellence which all the millions of 
Christian European blood — one hundred times more numerous than the Greek 
kindred — have been unable to surpass. England, Italy, France, Spain and Por- 
tugal have produced their epic poems, but the Iliad is the greatest of them all. 
Pindar's heroic odes are the models in their kind. The orations of Demosthenes 
are superior to the greatest efforts of all later orators. The scanty remnants of 
ancient Grecian sculpture — many of them mere mutilated fragments — have 
maintained their pre-eminence of merit in spite of all the genius and labor of 
modern statuaries. Architects of the present day have scarcely a hope to sur- 
pass the buildings or improve the proportions of Athenian architecture. 

But the Christians delight to dwell upon the moral purity and devout spirit 
of the Jews as compared with the Greeks. The latter people, and even their 
most famous and reputable men, were in the daily and notorious practice of 
debasing vices ; and their ordinary conversation, and the common pictures and 
ornaments in their houses were filled with ideas the most obscene and disgust- 
ing. That the Greeks were different from us in their notions of decency and 
propriety, is true; but whether they were more coarse and debased than the 
Jews is exceedingly doubtful. There is much to testify against the Greeks— 
their houses, pictures, statuary, household utensils, and books written by 
uncensored scribblers ; but there is no such testimony against the Jews, who 
have left nothing but sermons and annals written by slavish Levites. Yet 
even these books do not represent the Jews as having been models of morality. 
Human sacrifices were frequent in Judea during many centuries. (Ezek. XX. 
25, 31 ; 2 K. XXI. 6 ; XVII. 17 ; Jer. XIX. 5 ; XXXII. 35 ; Is. LVII. 5). In the 
sixteenth chapter of Ezekiel, written about 600 B. C, and after, as is represented, 
the Israelites had enjoyed for nine hundred years the purifying and enlighten- 
ing influences of the Word of God, Jehovah describes the depravity of the 
Jerusalemites as nobody ever described the Athenians: " As I live, saith the 
Lord, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughter, as thou hast done, 
thou and thy daughters." Compare with chapter XIX. of Genesis. The Douay 
translation says (1 K. XV. 15) that the mother of King Asa was "the princess* 



132 PRACTICAL EFFECTS. [SEC. LDC 

in the sacrifices of Priapus and in the grove which she had consecrated to him,'^ 
and such sacrifices by such a person presupposes a wide-spread devotion to the' 
most obscene rites. The translation made under King James, says (1 K. XVI 
12) that King Asa removed "the Sodomites out of the land." The multitude 
of wives and concubines maintained by David and Solomon, are evidence that- 
the Jewish morals were far from pure. But if it be admitted that the Jews 
were more devout and quite as pure in matters of amorous indulgence as the 
most sober communities of modern times, and if it be also admitted that the 
Greeks were as obscene in word and deed as the Christians have eve? repre- 
sented them, still impartial observers could scarcely say that the Hebrews 
were the more moral people. Judea was remarkably barren of good and great 
men. The character of Job commands respect, but he is not said to have been 
a descendant of Abraham. Of the other biblical heroes, the best are those of 
whom the least i3 said. David and" Solomon, to whom more space is given 
in the sacred records than to any other men,- were stained with almost every 
crime. We seek in vain through the whole Bib-ie for characters — for even one 
character — which may serve as a reasonable approximation to our modern 
ideal of a high moral nature. According to the sacred records, Israel never had 
any such men. But among the Greeks there were, in proportion to the total 
number of their people, multitudes of characters to which we cannot refuse our 
heartiest admiration — men in whom " greatness of mind seems but second to 
greatness of virtue"* — men whose moral nobility is unsurpassed in our 
own times— men whose glorious deeds makes the blood of every student of 
Grecian history tingle with enthusiastic admiration for them as he reads of 
their deeds.- No prominent man has -risen in modern Europe to emulate Timo- 
leon.f; America produced a rival, but no superior in Washington. The un- 
paralleled self-sacrifice of Leonidas and his band, the devotion of Socrates to 
intellectual freedom, and Aristides' exalted purity and sense of justice must 
remain as ideal models to all generations of men. The human mind can 
scarcely conceive a more loveable character than that of Epaminondas. Besides 
these, there are Solon, Pericles, Pelopiaas, Brasidas, Anaxagoras, Plato, Demo- 
critus, Zeno, Aristotle and Dion— all of them men whose moral natures were 
unequalled by any of the priests or kings of Israel. 

Neither has it been the rule in modern times that morality, popular enlight- 
enment and national prosperity have depended upon faith in the Bible • but 
rather the most prosperous nations of the present day— the English, Americans 
French and Germans— are notorious for the skeptical dispositions of the great 
majority of their most intelligent men. In all countries where faith in the Bible 

* John Foster-—" Aversion of Men of Taste to ETangelical Religion." 
t See the character of Timoleon as described in Grote's Greece. 



SEC. LIX.] CORRUPTIONS OF CHRISTIANITY. 133 

is undisturbed by doubt, the grossest superstitions prevail. Milman confesses, 
" It is idle, it is disingenuous to deny or to dissemble the early depravity of 
Christianity, its gradual but rapid departure from its primitive simplicity and 
purity, still more from its spirit of universal love." Middleton speaks of "the 
corrupt and degenerate state of the Church in the end of the fourth century, 
allowed by the most diligent inquiries into antiquity." On the corrupt state of 
the Church of late years, no long disquisition is needed for those who have seen 
much of the world with watchful eyes. The Christian Church is at this moment 
the grandest humbug in existence: and the majority of its intelligent support- 
ers know it, but find it a matter of pecuniary profit, and use the Church as 
they would use any other humbug. The history of Christianity from the time 
of the accession of Constantine, has been one long series of bickering and war, 
illioerality and despotism. 

" Christianity- was intended to reform the world : had an All-wise Being 
planned it, nothing is more improbable than that it should have failed : Omnis- 
cience would infallibly have forseen the inutilit}^ of a scheme which experience 
demonstrates to this age to have been utterly unsuccessful." Peace and good- 
will, in consequence of the prevalent religion, do not prevail more now among 
Christian nations than they did among the ancient Grecians, although many of 
the early followers of the Gospel expected that the dominion of the Bible would 
soon convert all swords into ploughshares. Lactantius,f the Christian father 
who wrote just before Constantine was converted to the faith of Jesus, and 
made it the State religion of Rome, "seemed firmly to expect and almost 
ventured to promise that the establishment of Christianity would restore the 
innocence and felicity of the primitive age ; that the worship of the true God 
would extinguish war and dissension among those who mutually considered 
themselves as the children of a common parent ; that every impure desire, 
every angry and selfish passion would be restrained by the gospel ; and that 
the magistrates might sheath the sword of justice among people who would be 
universally actuated by the sentiments of truth and piety, of equity and modera- 
tion, of harmony and uuiversal love." 

* Shelley ; Note to Queen Mab. t Gibbon's Decline and Fall. 



ERRORS OF THE INSPIRED. 



LX. Let us consider briefly the errors into which these prophets and 
apostles and clergymen have fallen — these men who held and hold divine com- 
missions to teach the truth of God to their fellow-men. 

And first, for the heroes of the Bible : 

Noah cursed Ham and all his descendants to endless slavery for accidentally 
seeing the parental nakedness: Gen. IX. 22-25. 

Noah was a perfect man : Gen. VI. 9 £ 

Abraham was a favorite with Jehovah: Gen. XII. 1-8; XX VI. 5; Luke 
XVI. 22. 

Abraham and Sarah agreed to deceive Pharaoh : Gen. XII. 11-19. 

Abraham took a concubine with Sarah's consent : Gen. XVI. 3. 

Abraham and Sarah agreed to deceive Abimelech: Gen. XX. 2-5. 

Abraham doubted Jehovah's promise: Gen. XXV. 8. 

Isaac was a favorite with Jehovah : Gen. XXVI. 2-5, 12, 24. 

Isaac and Rebekah agreed to deceive Abimelech: Gen. XXVI. 7-11. 

Jacob deceived Isaac and defrauded Esau : Gen. XXVII. 6-30. 

Jacob was a favorite with Jehovah: Gen. XXVIII. 13-15. 

Jacob practised polygamy and concubinage : Gen. XXIX. 23, 28 ; XXX. 

u, J. 

Jehovah promised to be with Aaron : Ex. IV. 15. 
Aaron was appointed Jehovah's high priest forever: Ex. XXVII. 21. 
Aaron was possessed of miraculous power : Ex. IV. 28, 30. 
Aaron rebelled against Moses : Ex. XII. 2. 

Aaron made the golden calf and worshipped it : Ex. XXXII. 1-6. 
Moses doubted Jehovah's word : Num. X. 21, 22. 
Moses hesitated to obey Jehovah's command : Ex. IV. 10, VI. 30. 
Moses requested the Lord to kill him : Num. XL 10-15. 
Moses remonstrated obstinately with the Lord : Num. XIV. 13-19. 
Moses lied, pretending to Pharaoh that the Israelites wished to leave Egypt 
only for the purpose of sacrificing to their God : Ex. V. 1. 



SEC. LX.] DAVID AXD URIAH'S WIFE. 135 

Moses directed the Jews to borrow jewels for purposes of fraud : Ex. XII. 
85, 36. 

Moses smashed the tables of the law, written by Jehovah's own hand : Ex. 
XXXI. 13, XXXII. 9. 

Joshua reproached Jehovah: Josh. VII. 7. 

Gideon doubted the word of the Lord : Judges VI. 13. 

Eli erred : 1 S. I. 13. 

Jeptha devoted his daughter to death while the spirit of the Lord was on him : 
Jud. XL 29-35. 

Samuel hesitated to obey Jehovah : 1 S. XVI. 1. 

Samuel lied : 1 S. XVI. 5. 

Samuel hewed Agag to p-'eces, before the Lord in Gilgal : 1 S. XV. 33. 

Samuel erred: 1 S. XVI. 8. 

Jehovah gave Saul a new heart : 1 S. X. 7, 9. 

Saul sought to kill David and Jonathan : 1 S. XXL 33. 

David took two hundred Philistine foreskins as trophies : 1 S. XX. 27. 

David practiced polygamy; 1 S. XXV. 39 ; 1 Ch. XIV. 3. 

David committed adultery with the wife of Uriah the Kittite : 2 S. XL 4. 

Several months afterwards, David, for the purpose of getting rid of Uriah, 
sent him to Joab, the general of the Jewish army in war, with a letter, saying 
" Set ye Uriah in the fore-front of the hottest battle, and retire ye from him 
that he may be smitten and die:" (2 S. XL 5-15). Joab obej-ed, and David 
soon had Uriah's widow all to himself, and she became the mother of Solomon 
and the ancestress of Jesus — that is, if the latter was of the blood of David. 

David delivered the seven sons of Saul to the Gibeonites to be hung: 2 S. 
XXL 8, 9. 

David was angry with the Lord : 2 S. VI. 8 ; 1 Ch. XIII. li. 

David was " a man after God's own heart" : Acts XIII. 22 ; 1 K. XL 46 
IX. 4. 

David cut the Ammonites with saws and hammers, and roasted them in 
ovens: 2 S. XII. 31 ; 1 Ch. XX. 3, 2. 

David ravaged the territory of Achish, whose guest he was, and he slew those 
whom he robbed, so that Achish should not learn the perpetrator of the wrong: 
1 S. XXVII. 8-12. 

David gained the chief men by bribes to make him king, and concerted with 
the traitor Abner to overthrow Ishbosheth, (2 S. III. 12), though the latter was 
the lawful heir of the throne, and a righteous man : 2 S. IV. 11. 

David sent Hushai to betray Absalom : 2 S. XV. 24. 

David broke his promise to Mephiboshcth : 2 S. IX. 7, XVI. 3, 4, XIX. 29. 

David ordered Joab, a faithful man, to be put to death : 1 K. II. 6. 



136 ERRORS OP THE INSPIRED. [sEC> LX» 

David was a man of blood : 1 Ch. XXII. 8, XXTIIL 3. 

Nathan, a holy prophet, erred; 2 S. TIL 3, 4. 

Solomon caused the assassination of his brother Adonijah: 1 K. IL 25. 

Solomon appointed the assassin to be his priest : 1 K. IL 35. 

Solomon had seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines : 1 K. XL 3. 

Solomon committed idolatry : 1 K. XL 7. 

Jehovah was with Solomon : 2 Ch. L 1. 

The Lord gave Solomon more than human wisdom i 1 R. III. 2, IT. 29 ; 2 
Ch. I. 11. 

The prophet Zedekiah slapped the face of the prophet Micah, in the presence 
of King Jehosaphat: 2 Ch. XTIII. 23. 

Jeremiah damned his luck: Jer. XX. 14-18* 

Jeremiah lied: Jer. XXXTIII. 27. 

Jonah, a true prophet, tried to run away from Jehovah : Jonah I. 10. 

"It displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was very angry" that Jehovah did 
not fulfil his authorized prophecy of the destruction of Nineveh : Jonah IT. 1. 

Two of the apostles of Christ desired to destroy an unbelieving village with 
fire from Heaven : Luke IX. 54. 

Peter corrected Christ : Mat. XTI. 23. 

Peter denied Christ : Mat. XXTI. 69. 

Peter cut off Malchus' ear : Mat. XXTI. 51. 

Paul damned Alexander, the coppersmith, with polite phrase : he " did me 
much evil — the Lord rewarded him according to his works" : 1 Tim. L 20; 2 
Tim. IT. 14. 

Paul cursed those who preached a doctrine different from his own • Gal. I. 8> 9» 

Paul declared that Peter deserved to be blamed : Gal. II. 11. 

The apostles mistook the meaning of the Old Testament: (Acts* II. 14-21, 25- 
34; III. 18, 21-24; IT. 25, 26; Gal. IT. 24; 1 Cor. X. 4,) and yet the apostles 
were inspired to explain the true sense and spirit of the Old Testament : (Acts 
XXTI. 22, 23; XXTIIL 23.) 

The apostles differed*: Acts XT. 6-39; Gal. 1. 11, II. 14; 2 Peter III. 16. 
Compare with these : Gal. III., Rom. III., James IL 

They disputed, after Christ's predictions of his death, as to who should be 
the greatest in the coming kingdom : Mat. XX. 24 ; Mark IX. 35 ; Luke XXII. 25. 

They went so far as to ask for seats at the right hand and at the left : Mat. 
XIX. 28, XX. 21 j Mark X. 37 ; Luke XXII. 30. 

They thought that Christ's kingdom would appear immediately at Jerusalem: 
Luke XIX. 11, XXIT. 21. 

They supposed that the second coming of Christ was to be at the destruction 

* See Appendix, Note 12. 



SEC. LX.| BYRON AND BACON ON THE PRIESTS. 137 

of Jerusalem by Titus: Mat. XXI Y. 33, 34; Mark XIII. 29, 30; Luke XVII. 22- 
37; XXI. 5-36. 

They thought that Jesus would come in that generation : Mat. X. 23, XVI. 28 ; 
John XXI. 23 ; 1 Cor. VII. 29, X. 11, XV. 51, &c. 

They misunderstood the prophecy of the resurrection : Mat. XVII. 9 ; Mark 
IX. 31 ; Luke IX. 45, XVIII. 34; John XX. 9 ; II. 19-22. 

Some thought that Christ's body had been removed by the gardener: John 
XX. 15. 

They would not believe the women's story of the resurrection : Luke XXIV. 
11. 

The conversation of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is proof that 
they had never expected the resurrection : Luke XXIV. 11. 

The disciples fled when Jesus was arrested : Mat. XXIV. 36. 

Christ was buried by a stranger : Mark XV. 43. 

As for the clergymen, the priests of the Christian Church, there are undoubt- 
edly some good men among them, but the majority are no better than their pre- 
decessors, the Levites, against whom Jesus had so much to say. Byron said of 
them, that they sought " to merit Heaven by making earth a Hell." Bacon 
says, " You may find all access to any species of philosophy, however pure, in- 
tercepted by the ignorance of divines." The world is indebted to the Christian 
priests for a long series of wars, persecutions and inquisitions, but it is unneces- 
sary to encumber these pages with the bloody record. 



LITERARY MERIT. 



LXI. If a book-revelation from Heaven has been given, we must sup- 
pose that the book Avould be written with perfect wisdom, and would contain 
all the information in regard to religion and morality undiscoverable by human 
reason, and proper for man to know. Unequalled depth of thought, and sim- 
plicity, clearness, and compactness of style should characterise the writings of 
a divine author ; but these are not the characteristics of the Bible. The laws 
of Moses were certainly composed by no divine intellect, for they are far inferior 



138 LITERARY MERIT. | SEC. LXI. 

in every respect to many mere human codes. Many passages of Job and 
Isaiah, and the Psalms, are well written, but they are not more beautiful than 
the writings of uninspired moral poets. Not a verse can be found in the whole 
Bible, for which an equal may not be found in some profane author. 

As a whole the book is exceedingly dull, confused and obscure. There is no 
appropriateness, clearness or beauty of plan. History, prophecy, poetry, and 
teachings of morality, ceremonial observances and criminal law are all scattered 
about without order or apparent design. In the Pentateuch alone, the writer 
changes from history to the law and from the law to history more than twenty 
times. In some of the historical books long periods are skipped over without 
a word, and not unfrequently there are abrupt changes from one subject to 
another; and there are frequent repetitions of long passages, where one author 
has evidently copied word for word from another. Examples may be found by 
a comparison of the following passages : 

Compare 2 S. XXIII. 8-39 with 1 Ch. XI. 10-47. 
" 1 S. XXXI. 1-3 with 1 Ch. X. 1-12. 
" 2 S. V. 17-25 with 1 Ch. XIY. 8-16. 
2 S. VI. 1-11 with 1 Ch. XIII. 5-14. 
2 S. VII. 1-29 with 1 Ch. XVII. 1-27. 
" 2 S. VIII. 1-18 with 1 Ch. XVIII. 1-17. 
2 S. X. 1-19 with 1 Ch. XIX. 1-19. 
2 S. XXIV. 1-25 with 1 Ch. XXL 1-27. 
1 K. VIII. 12-50 with 2 Ch. VI. 1-39. 
" 1 K. X. 1-29 with 2 Ch. IX. 1-28. 
1 K. XII. 1-19 with 2 Ch. X. 1-19. 

1 K. XXII. 2-35 with 2 Ch. XVII. 1-34. 
" 2 K. XI. 4-40 with 2 Ch. XXIII. 1-21. 

" 2 K. XVIII. 13, 17-37 with Is. XXXVI. 1-22. 

2 K. XIX. 1-37 with Is. XXXVII. 1-38 ; 2 Ch. XXXII. 1-24. 
2 K. XX. 12-21 with Is. XXXIX. 1-8 ; 2 Ch. XXXII. 24-33. 
Ps. XVIII. 2-50 with 2 S. XVII. 1-54. 

" Ps. CV. 1-15 with 1 Ch. XVI. 8-22. 
" Ps. XCVI. 1-13 with 1 Ch. XVI. 23-33. 
It has never been claimed that there was any superhuman wisdom in the 
Criminal Code of Moses ; and as for his law of religious ceremonies far from 
beiug divinely wise, it is only utterly ridiculous. He would be a singular 
Deity who should inspire a prophet to write a gospel containing such sentences 
as these : 

"And they make coats of fine linen, of woven work for Aaron, and for his 
sons, and a mitre of fine linen, and goodly bonnets of fine linen, and Jinen 



sec. lxi.] Solomon's pious song. 139 

breeches of fine twined linen, and a girdle of fine twined linen, and bine, and 
purple, and scarlet, of needle-work; as the Lord co?nmanded Moses." (Ex. 
XXXIX. 27-29) ; or these : 

** And the priest shall dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand, 
and shall sprinkle of the oil with his finger seven times before the Lord ; and 
of the rest of the oil that is in his hand shall the priest put upon the tip of 
the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, [of leprosy] and upon the thumb of 
the right hand, and upon the great toe of the right foot." (Lev. XIV. 16, 17.) 

There are many passages in the Old Testament which are inexcusably and 
even grossly obscene, particularly a passage in Ezek. XXIII. 20. The Song of 
Solomon is a remarkable production to be included in a gospel. It is said to 
be an allegory of the love of Christ for the Church, but the literal language is 
very similar to such as a heathen poet might use in regard to earthly lovers — 
such as Solomon may be supposed to have written in his idolatrous years to 
some favorite concubine. The lover says " thou hast doves' eyes ;" " thy teeth 
are like a flock of sheep that are even shorn ;" "thy lips are like a thread of 
scarlet;" " thy neck is as a tower of ivory;" "thy two breasts are like two 
young roes ;" " the joints of thy thighs are like jewels ;" "thy navel is like a 
round goblet, which wanteth not liquor;" [referring of course to the sacra- 
mental cup and wine of the Church] ; " thy stature is like to a palm tree;" and 
finally " until the day break and the shadows fall away, I [Christ] will get me 
to the mountain of myrrh, [what portion of the church is that?] and to the hill 
of frankincense." Neither is the beloved one taken at random, for Solomon 
has " threescore queens and fourscore concubines, and virgins without num- 
ber;" but she is more lovely than them all, " the fairest among women." 

She [the church] replies : " my beloved [Christ] is white and ruddy, the 
chiefest among ten thousand ;" " his locks are bushy and black as a raven ;" 
"his eyes are as the eyes of doves by the rivers of waters, washed with milk 
and fitly set, his cheeks are as a bed of spices," "his lips like lilies dropping 
sweet-smelling myrrh," " his hands are as gold rings set with beryl, his belly 
is as bright ivory overlaid with sapphires," " his legs are as pillars of marble 
set upon sockets of fine gold," "his mouth is most sweet, yea, he is altogether 
lovely;" "a bundle of myrrh is my beloved unto me; he shall lie all night 
between my [the Church's] breasts." "He brought me to the banqueting 
house and his banner over me was love ; stay me with flagons, comfort me 
with apples, for I am sick of love." "Make haste my beloved, and be thou 
like to a roe, or to a yonng hart upon a mountain of spices." " Let us get up 
early to the vineyards; let us see if the vine flourish, whether the tender 
grape appear, and the pomegranate bud forth; there will I give thee my loves." 
0, Solomon! Solomon! far was your lecherous soul from thinking that you 



140 LITERARY MERIT. [SEC. LXI. 

and jour paramour would be converted into symbols of Christ and the Church, 
and that your song would be circulated and received all over the world as part 
of the word of God ! 

To read the Bible intelligibly requires much information, a knowledge of 
geography, history, chronology, and the arts, besides the Hebrew and Greek 
languages, in which the books were originally written, and from which no 
translations have been made by the authority of the alleged divine author. A man 
cannot read the Bible until he has learned his letters, and cannot appreciate its 
meaning until his mind has been educated to habits of thought by long training. 
Far from being simple and clear, the Bible is the most equivocal in meaning of 
all books, as the multitude of sects may testify, which all seriously believe that 
their doctrines are taught, and that their doctrines alone are taught, in its 
pages. That is a very questionable divine revelation which is differentlv un- 
derstood by different persons. Indeed many, the most celebrated priests, have 
declared that the prophets and apostles wrote with two meanings — one apparent 
the other hidden — one literal, the other figurative. If the literal meaning was 
foolish or manifestly untrue, they could retreat to the figurative, and twist that in 
any way to suit themselves. Origen was one of the earliest Christian advocates 
of the double meaning, and he said : — " Were it necessary to attach ourselves 
to the letter, and to interpret the law after the manner of the Jews or of the 
populace, I should blush to say aloud that it is God who has given us such laws ; 
I should find even more grandeur and reason in human codes, such as those of 
the Athenians, Lacdaemonians, and Romans." Gibbon, in speaking of some of 
the double interpretations used by the Pagan priests, (for this trick has been 
used wherever there has been an alleged book-revelation), gets off a happy sar- 
casm : — " As the traditions of pagan mythology were variously related, the 
sacred interpreters were at liberty to select the most convenient circumstances, 
and as they translated an arbitrary cipher, they could extract from any fable, 
any sense which was adapted to their favorite system of religion and philo- 
sophy. The lascivious form of a naked Yenus was tortured into the discovery 
of some moral precept or physical truth; and the castration of Atys explained 
the revolution of the sun between the tropics or the separation of the human 
soul from vice and error." In passages where no figurative interpretation 
will suffice, there it is seriously proposed to make the literal different from the 
apparent meaning. Professor Wheweli, whose piety outruns his sense, gravely 
asks* :— " When should old interpretations [of Bible passages] be given up ; 
what is the proper measure for a religious and enlightened commentator to 
make a change in the current interpretation of sacred Scripture ? or, at what 
period ought the established exposition of a passage to be given up, and a new 

* Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences— Chapter on the relation of History to 
Palaeontology. 



sec. lxl] no new light in the BIBLE. l4i 

mode of understanding the passsage, such as is, or seems to be, required by 
■new discoveries respecting the laws of nature, be accepted in its place ? It is 
plain that to introduce such an alteration lightly and hastily would be a. 
procedure iraugh with inconvenience; for ?f the change were made in such a 
manner, it might be afterwards discovered that it had been adopted without 
sufficient reason, and that it was necessary to remstatethe old exposition. And 
the minds of the readers of scripture, always te a certain extent, and for a time 
disturbed by the subversion of their long established notions, would be dis- 
tressed without any need, and might be seriously unsettled. While, on the 
^ther h&nd ; a toe protracted and obstinate resistance to the innovation on the 
part of scriptural expositors, would tend to identify, at least in the minds of 
-many, the authority of the scripture with the truth of the exposition, and there- 
fore would bring discredit upon the revealed word, when the established inter- 
pretation was proved to be untenable. : ' 

The Xew Testament is exceedingly defective for the want of a clear and con- 
cise exposition of the doctrines of the early Christian Church. Every sect now 
writes its own " confession of faith" instead of repeating the words of Jesus, 
We do not know what the early Christian Church believed, and if we did, we 
would probably find reason to deny that their tenets were in accordance with 
.ihe doctrines laid down by Christ, the apostles and the Evangelists. Noth- 
ing that is mysterious to the Pagan is less so to the Christian ; and, in addition 
to the unexplained problems of nature, the believer in the Bible is burdened 
with numerous mysteries of his religion. " The temptation by a literal serpent 
in Paradise, the federal union of all mankind in Adam, the imputation of the 
actual guilt of Adam to ourselves, the various covenants enumerated as 
formally established between God and man, the Athanasian explanation of the 
Trinity, the eternal procession of the Son, the imputation of righteousness 
unconditional election, the moral inability of man placed side by side with free 
agency on the one hand and his eternal condemnation on the other, and many 
more doctrines, which it is needless .to mention — these, however stirring and 
awful in their nature, cannot certainly be regarded as forming a system pecu- 
liarly characterized oy its simplicity."* 

The Bible offers no new light upon the great problems of natural religion : it 
asserts that there is a personal and conscious deity: it asserts that the soul lives 
after the death of the body; it asserts that men are unhappy now because their 
forefathers sinned; but there is no appeal to the reason in connection with all 
these points ; the appeal is made to faith alone; and if we say that we cannot 
■believe without evidence, the only reply is — "he that believeth not shall- be 
damned." 

* Moreli. Philosophy of Religion—Preface. 



142 LITERARY MERIT. [SEC. LXI. 

The claims of high literary merit for the Bible cannot be granted without in- 
creasing the importance of some of its defects. The prophets and apostles have 
given to us no clear, compact, concise, comprehensive and evidently correct 
rules for our religious, moral and political conduct. Jesus never expressly ab- 
rogated the Mosaic law or any important portion of it. He never said expressly 
that slavery, polygamy or concubinage was wrong or right. When asked about 
the authority of the emperors, he replied that it was necessary to render unto 
Cassar the things that were Caesar's, and that all governments derive their power 
from ou high ; but it was left for the infidels of a much later age to give cur- 
rency to— if not to discover — the truths, that people are not made for the benefit 
of kings and nobles, that sovereignty resides in the people, and that all men have 
an inalienable right to the possession and free enjoyment of life and liberty. 
The religious doctrines, in regard to which the Bible contradicts itself or is not 
explicit, are too numerous to be repeated here. If the Bible be received as a 
patchwork, made from the writings of many ignorant and unwise men, many 
omissions, contradictions and errors may reasonably be expected and excused ; 
but if the book be represented as the composition of exceedingly able authors, 
we must at once say, they should have written a more harmonious and satisfac- 
tory work, even without any aid from Heaven. 

Whatever the literary merit of the Bible may be, the book is not rated very 
highly by, nor is its influence very great with literary men in general. Christi- 
anity is treated with respect and deference, and occasional praise, by authors, 
editors and statesmen, because it is the traditional faith of the European blood, 
and because it is deeply rooted in the prejudices of a respectable portion of the 
community, and because there is little zealous opposition to it ; but this respect, 
deference, and praise, are only such as are paid to all prevalent systems in all 
countries and in all times. It has never been observed that any very powerful, 
social, political or religious institution has prevailed for any considerable length 
of time among men, without having been praised as superior to all rival sys- 
tems. It has been so with slavery, polygamy, polytheism and monarchy, and 
it is so with Braminism, Mahomedanism, Confucianism, and Christianity. 
But the general tone of our literature is hostile to the Bible. The newspaper 
press geuerally ignore the plan of salvation and the theory of a future life, the 
delights of Heaven and the fears of Hell, or treat them with that patronizing air 
wh ch betrays unbelief, with a desire to give no offense. Bacon remarks : 
" Experience demonstrates how learned men have been arch heretics, and how 
learned times have been inclined to Atheism." A great many authors have 
called attention to the unchristian tone of our general literature. John Foster, 
a prominent man among the evangelical orthodox, wrote an Essay with the 
ominous title, " On the Aversion of Men of Taste to Evangelical Religion," 



SEC. LXI.] OUR LITERATURE IS PAGAN. 143 

wherein he says: "I fear it is incontrovertible, that what is termed polite 
literature, the grand school in which taste acquires its laws and refined percep- 
tions, and in which are formed much more than in any higher austere discipline, 
the moral sentiment, is for the greater part hostile to the religion of Christ." 
Dr. Alexander, in his work on the Evidences of Christianity, says, " the scrip- 
tures, although they contain the highest excellence of composition, both in 
prose and poetry, of which a good taste cannot be insensible, are neglected by 
literary men, or rather studiously avoided." And again, " This common dislike 
of the Bible, even in men of refined taste and decent lives, furnishes a strong 
argument for its divine origin." Let due credit be given to Dr. Alexander for 
the discovery of a new rule ; every doctrine rejected by men of refined tastes and 
decent lives is of divine origin. This reasoning is more wonderful even than 
that of the bloody old Tertullian, who, in disputing with some heretics about 
the reality of Christ's human nature, wrote, "The son of God was crucified ; it 
is no shame to own it because it is a thing to be ashamed of. The son of 
God died ; it is wholly credible because it is absurd. When buried, he rose 
again to life ; it is certain because it is impossible." The North British Review 
(Feb., 1852,) confesses, "The genius of our literature is not only not consonant 
with that of the gospel, but often, though without any polemical purpose, quite 
hostile to it, so that every truly Christian mind must feel that the fascinations 
of literature are not without their danger." And on another occasion (Nov., 
1853,) the same periodical says, "the vast majority of the works of imagination 
and fiction which come from the press in the present day, are as Pagan as 
works produced m the atmosphere of Christian influence can be." Strauss, in 
his Christliche Glaubenslehre, remarks, "the intellectual atmosphere of our 
time has become pregnant with anti-ecclesiastical ideas, and every theological 
institution which grants time to its pupils to breathe in this atmosphere, will 
produce few orthodox and sincere leaders for the Christian church." 



SPREAD OF CHRISTIANITY; 



LXII. The advocates of Christianity have argued that the spread of thei;?- 
faith among all the most civilized nations, unaided bj the sword, and its per- 
manence, furnish proof of its divine origin.. It is not to be denied that the 
Bible has really attained a greater dominion than any other alleged revelation^ 
and did at one time command the almost implicit belief of all the great and. 
good men in Europe, but its success has surely not been so great as to prove its 
immediate divine origin. It is very doubtful whether any amount of success^ 
among men, even universal acceptation of. a creed, would furnish reliable 
evidence of its truth. But universal acceptation the Bible never had.. Christi- 
anity spread with comparative rapidity in the first three centuries after the 
death of Jesus, but its success can easily be accounted, for by natural eauses . 
It had its origin when- the political power of the Roman empire, and the intel- 
lectual dominion of the Grecian mythology, were crumbling to pieces. The 
prevalent polytheism had ceased to command belief. The people were ignorant 1 
and superstitious, and little qualified to form a reasonable opinion of what we 
now call religious truth. The simple faith of the philosopher was beyond their 
intelligence and at variance with their prejudices,, and they sought refuge in : 
the reason-detying mysteries and in tMe pompous ceremonies of the Christian 
priests. 

If the great success of Christianity, unassisted hy the sword, may prove the 
truth of the Bible, surely the truth of Mormonism may be proved by the spread 
of that faith, which,, during the first thirty years of its existence, has certainly 
gained as many converts as did the doctrines of Jesus within a like period. Jo» 
Smith began his ministry in the midst of the most intelligent people on eartb ? 
in the midst of a creed which, though dj-ing, is far from dead, and in a rising 
civilization. Jesus began his ministry in the midst of a rude people, a dead 
creed — in Greece and Rome — and a rapidly decaying civilization. The Mor- 
mons number several hundred thousand ;. they have missionaries in all parts- 
of the world, the}' are ready to die for their faith, and they are spoken of and 
treated by the " Gentiles" just as the early Christians were- Every argument 



SEC. LXII.] PURITY OF ISLAMIST. 145 

from the spread of Christianity for the truth of the Bible can be used with far- 
more force in favor of Mormonism. A similar argument might be adduced to 
show that the Koran is a divine revelation. Jt has long been asserted that 
Mohammedanism owed its great success to the sword, but this falsehood is 
completely refuted by Gibbon. The Mohammedans gave all their newly con- 
quered subjects a free choice of the Koran, tribute or the sword ; terms quite 
as liberal as those offered by Christian conquerors. Besides,, where did Moham- 
med get his sword ? Buddhism has as many believers as Christianity, and its 
teachers and propagators, unlike the followers of Jesus, have never resorted to 
the sword to convince unbelievers. But both Buddhism and Mohammedanism 
have a great advantage over Christianity, in that ehey have been preserved pure 
as when first taught, Gibbon, writing of Mohammed, says>* " It is not the- 
propagation, but the permanency of his religion, that deserves our wonder ; the 
same pure and perfect impression which he engraved at Mecca and Medina i& 
preserved after the revolutions of twelve centuries, by the Indian, the African,, 
and the Turkish proselytes of the Koran. If the Christian apostles,. St. Peter 
and St. Paul, could return to the Vatican, they might possibly inquire the name 
of the Deity who is worshipped with such mysterious rites in that magnificent 
temple ; at Oxford, or Geneva they would experience less surprise, but it might 
still be incumbent on them to peruse the catechism of the church, and to study 
the orthodox commentators on their own writings and the words of their mas- 
ter." Jehovah then allows his own pure teachings to be corrupted with all 
manner of superstitions,, and at the same time permits the fraudulent systems, 
of heathen impostors to be preserved unadulterated through long ages ! But 
if the Bible be the word of God, how is it that so many men, so many great and 
good men, still remain unconverted?' "If He has spoken why is not the 
■universe converted f* f 

* Decline and Fall— Ch. L, t System of Nature. 



THE WITNESS OF THE SPIRIT. 



LXIII. Believers in the Bible say that they have conclusive proof of the 
truth of their faith in the witness of the spirit — a peculiar exhihration or conn 
dence which they feel at times in regard to their religion. That is to say, when 
thinking of Jehovah they are conscious of a superstitious awe, as children are 
scared when threatened by the nurse with the raw-head and bloody-bones ; or 
they think of going to heaven with so much assurance that they enjoy part of the 
pleasure beforehand. Macaulay, in his review of Ranke's History of the Popes, 
speaking of the peculiar mental excitement or enthusiasm, known as " the wit- 
ness of the spirit," says : — " It not uufrequently happens that a tinker or coal- 
heaver bears a sermon, 01 falls in with a tract, which alarms him about the state 
of his soul. If be be a man of excitable nerves and strong imagination, he thinks 
himself given over to the evil power. He doubts whether he has not committed 
the unpardonable sin. He imputes every wild fancy that springs up in his 
mind to the whisper flf a fiend. His sleep is broken by dreams of the great 
judgment-seat, the open books, and the unquenchable fire. If, in order to 
escape from these vexing thoughts, he flies to amusement or to licentious indul- 
gence, the delusive relief o.;ly makes his misery darker and more hopeless. At 
length a turn takes place. He is reconciled to his offended maker. To borrow 
the fine imagery of one who had himself been thus tried, he emerges from the 
Yalley of the Shadow of Death, from the dark land of gins and snares, of quag- 
mires and precipices, of evil spirits and ravenous beasts. The sunshine is on 
his path. He ascends the Delectable Mountains, and catches from their sum- 
mit a distant view of the shining city which is the end of his pilgrimage," and 
he has the witness of the spirit. Such is the sum and substance of this 
weighty evidence, which is confidently appealed to in favor of all creeds 
wherein a heaven and hell contribute to raise the hopes and excite the fears of 
the superstitious and the ignorant. This witness of the spirit is supposed to 
be particularly strong with all martyrs ; but if this testimony suffice for proof, 
all religious creeds, extensively received, must be true. All have martyrs, 
each equally convinced of the truth of his peculiar creed by the witness of his 



SEC. LXIII.] WITNESS OF THE SPIRIT. 147 

spirit. Locke says : — " A strong and firm persuasion of any proposition relat- 
ing to religion, for which a man hath either no or not sufficient proofs from 
reason, but receives them as truths wrought in the mind by extraordinary 
influence comiug immediately from God himselfj seems to me to be enthusiasm 
which can be no evidence or ground of assurance at all, nor can by any means 
be taken for knowledge. If such groundless thoughts as these concerning 
ordinary matters and not religion, possess the mind strongly, we call it raving, 
and every one thinks it a degree of madness ; in religion, men accustomed to 
the thoughts of revelation make a greater allowance to it, though indeed it be a 
more dangerous madness ; but men are apt to think in religion they may, or 
ought to, quit their reason. I find that the Christians, Mohammedans, and 
Brahmans all pretend to this immediate inspiration ; but it is certain that con- 
tradictions and falsehoods cannot come from God; nor can any one that is of 
the true religion be assured of anything by a way whereof those of a false 
religion may be and are equally confirmed in theirs. For the Turkish Der- 
vishes pretend to revelations, ecstacies, visions, raptures, to be transported 
with the illumination of God, etc. The Jangis [Jaunas?] among the Hindoos 
talk of being illuminated and entirely united to God, as well as the most spirit- 
ualized Christians." 



EEYIEW. 



LXIY. We have thus examined the principal points of the evidence against 
the divine inspiration of the Bible. Let us recall them to mind : 

1. The Pentateuch was not written by Moses, nor by any one man, nor at 
the alleged date of its composition. 

2. There is no satisfactory evidence that any of the books of the Bible were 
written by their alleged authors. 

3. Many books said in the Bible to be of divine authority have been lost. 

4. Those books, which we have, have not been preserved in purity. 

5. The books, which we have, were selected from a number of other similar 
books, in a barbarous age, according to rules and for reasons unknown to us, 
by men known to have practiced numerous great frauds. 



148 REVIEW OF ARGUMENTS. [SEC LXIV. 

6. Xone of the prominent doctrines of the Bible were original with Moses, 
with Jesus, or with Paul. All the important doctrines of the Mosaic law — 
monotheism, worship by sacrifice, incense, singing and dancing, circumcision, 
observance of one day in seven as sacred, hereditary priesthood, use of sacred 
books, the divine nature, and the partiality of the Deity for their own nation 
— all were copied from the Egyptians. The important doctrines of the New 
Testament, the trinity, the incarnation, the logos, the redemption, the immor- 
tality of the soul, rewards and punishments in a future life, the necessity 
of belief to salvation, and the all-sufficiency of love— all these were common 
among, and learned from, heathen nations surrounding Judea. 

7. Miracles are impossible. 

8. If they were possible, man could never recognize them as violations of the 
laws of nature. 

9. The miracles reported in the Bible never were clone. 

10. If they had been done they would not prove the Bible to be true. 

11. If they were done, miracles ought to be common to this day. 

12. The reported miracles are only appeals to vulgar superstitions. 

13. There are no successful prophecies in the Bible. 

14. The numerous appeals of the Evangelists to ancient Hebrew prophecies 
are all manifest errors. 

15. The Hebrew priests had foretold the coming of a Christ, (Messiah, 
anointed person,) but he was to be a king, a political leader of the house of 
David, and not a religious teacher or Levite ; while Jesus was neither a political 
leader nor a descendant of David. 

16. The Bible contains a vast number of false prophecies. 

17. The miracles and prophecies reported in the Bible are not so well 
accredited as many others which are universally confessed to be the inventions 
of fraud and credulity. 

18. The morality of the Old Testament is extremely coarse and defective. 

19. The main precepts of morality of the Xew Testament are fit only for 
slaves. 

The history of the creation of the universe, as given by Moses, is false 
from beginning to end. 

21. The chronology of the Bible is false, and is confessed to be so by many 
of the greatest Christian authors. 

22. The Mosaic story of the repeated revolts of the Jews during the time 
when Jehovah was leading the tribe from Egypt, with numerous and unexam- 
pled wonders, is contrary to all reason. 

23. The Bible recognizes the miraculous powers of witches and sorcerers. 

24. Jesus a::d the Evangelists believed that insane and epileptic persons were 
possessed by devils. 



SEC. LXIV.] THIRTY-THREE POINTS PROVEN. 149 

25. The Bible contains a vast number of contradictory statements. 

26. It teaches a vast number of false doctrines — doctrines which cannot be 
proved to be true, and doctrines which can be proved to be untrue — such as 
the existence of a personal, anthropomorphic deity, the immortality of the soul, 
the moral accountability of man to the deity, and the immediate government 
of the universe by the deity without the intervention of general laws. 

27. The scheme of redemption is absurd. 

28. The Bible contradicts itself in regard to the immortality of the soul, the 
myth of Adam's sin, the oneness of God, the means of attaining divine favor, 
the existence of a devil, the general spirit of religious and moral law, and the 
permanence of Judaism. 

29. Under the Mosaic law Jesus was a criminal and deserved to be executed. 

30. The Bible has done no more good to man than has been done by many 
human institutions. The Hebrews, Jehovah's favorite people, did nothing for 
civilization. The heathen Greeks laid the foundation for all our arts, sciences, 
and philosophy. 

31. The prophets and favorites of Jehovah were guilty of many great crimes. 

32. The Bible is not written with any superhuman ability. 

33. Christianity has not been as successful as it should have been if of imme- 
diate divine origin. 

Nearly all these points strike at the very vitals of Christianity ; on all of 
them the evidence is strong, if not conclusive ; and nowhere in the whole 
course of the examination, with the purest desire to grant all that could reason- 
ably be demanded for the Bible, have we found a solitary point of importance 
in its favor. 

In the next section we shall endeavor to show that human reason can never 
foe certain of having arrived at final, absolute, and perfect truth. 



IS THERE ANY ABSOLUTE TRUTH ? 



LXV. Is it possible for man to learn anything which he can prove to be 
absolutely true ? If he cannot, Christianity will hardly deserve to be accepted 
as a certainty. 

The only means we have to learn the reality of things, are the senses and 
reason. "\Ye learn premises by sensation, and we draw conclusions by reason. 



150 IS THERE ANY ABSOLUTE TRUTH ? [SEC. LXV. 

Keason cannot discover original premises. The reliability then of our conclu- 
sions must depend upon the evidence of the senses. But it has been discovered 
that the senses are very liable to err. The eye says that grass is green, that 
the green color is in the grass, is part of it; and the idea seems to be finally 
confirmed by the knowledge that the green color may be boiled out of the grass 
and communicated to water. But philosophy or reason comes in and says the 
green color is not in the grass, it is only in the light; there is no color in the 
visible objects of nature ; all the idea of color is a mere illusion — an apparent 
{act but not a real one — a cheat of the senses. The savage, taking his senses 
for a guide, supposes the stars to be small lights in the heavens; the philoso- 
pher knows them to be great planets. An uneducated man does not compre- 
hend that sound is a mere movement of the air striking upon a delicate nerve 
of the ear; the noise, as generall}" conceived, is only in the idea. Men whose 
legs have been cut off while they were under the influence of chloroform, on 
returning to consciousness, but before learning of the amputation, have com- 
plained of pain or itching in different toes of the severed foot, and have insisted 
obstinately that they were not in error as to the locality of the pain. When 
told that the leg was cut off, they have obstinately refused to believe it, and 
could only be convinced by seeing. Physiology explains the error. All the 
senses are liable to error ; not one of them can be implicitly relied on. If the 
senses are liable to error, then reason can draw no perfectly reliable conclusions 
from the premises founded on the evidence of the senses. The common belief 
in the absolute and unconditional existence of matter is founded only on the 
evidence of the senses, and is not accepted as truth by many — perhaps a 
majority — of the greatest philosophers. Diderot, D'Alembert, Mackintosh, 
Dugald Stewart, Brougham, and Carlyle, have agreed in saying that he who 
has never rejected tha absolute existence of matter has no talent for meta- 
physics. 

Man only knows by thinking, by an idea: he knows there is a sun only 
because he sees it, because he thinks he sees it. He cannot get beyond the idea ; 
perhaps the idea agrees to the actual fact; perhaps it does not; perhaps there 
is nothing but the idea. There is no evidence — not the remotest particle of evi- 
dence — that anything exists independently of man's idea, or if there be any in- 
dependent existence, that it is as the idea represents it to be. 

For each individual man, there are two kinds of existence; himself, and all 
beyond himself— the "Me" and the " Not me." The "Not me" exists only in 
the idea of the "Me," is a purely ideal existence: but does the "Me" exist? 
You reply " I think, therefore I exist."* But in saying "/think" you take the 
existence of the "1" for granted — the very question at issue. It is true that the 

* This was the argument of Descartes. 



SEC. LXV.] LIFE 13 A DREAM. 151 

"I" is conscious of its existence; but consciousness is only a species of sensa- 
tion. Without the aid of reason we could not know what consciousness is; nor 
could we comprehend its teachings, and therefore consciousness will not suffice 
to establish truth. Shakespeare* represents a certain Christopher Sly, a 
drunken vagabond, who had lived in misery and dirt all his life, as having been 
taken up while intoxicated and asleep, and placed in bed in the palace of a lord. 
When he had grown sober and awakened, he found a multitude of servants 
waiting upon him, and the principal ones asked anxiously how he was, express- 
ed great joy at his recovery, and wished to know his commands. He replied 
that he was quite well, he was Christopher Sly, he dwelt in such a place. They 
told him that he was the hereditary lord of that castle, but had been crazy since 
childhood, and had supposed himself to be a certain Christopher Sly, vagabond- 
izing, drinking bad liquor, keeping low company and lying in the gutters. 
Finally Christopher was persuaded that all his past life was a dream, and he be- 
gan to act the lord. He soon got drunk, his fine clothes were taken off, his old 
rags put on and he was again placed in the gutter. When he came to himself, 
it was sometime before he could get back to the idea that he was only Christo- 
pher Sly, and then he came to the conclusion that the lordship was only a dream. 
In this story Shakespeare has painted the nature of human knowledge truly. 
No man has any more secure knowledge of the past than Christopher Sly had, 
and he acted in accordance with the principles which ought to govern a philo- 
sophic mind. There is no mau who, by skilful management, might not be 
brought to believe all past life to be only a dream, an unreality. Every man 
knows by experience that it is often very difficult to distinguish between things 
remembered and things dreamed of. Men in dreaming, often ask themselves 
whether they are not dreaming, aud come to the conclusion that they are wide 
awake. All these things go to show the uncertainty of all human knowledge. 
There are certain things which we can safely assume that we will always be- 
lieve, such as that two and two make four, but this is implied in the definition 
of the word "four;" and our continued belief in anything not a matter of defi- 
nition is uncertain. The belief of men has often changed in regard to the nature 
and existence of the Deity. The Christians say that they have now the absolute 
knowledge that a Deity exists, and what his nature is ; but all the other religious 
sects have said the same, and no two agree with their absolute knowledge. 
How can a Christian know but that to-morrow some development of science will 
compel him to change his creed in regard to the nature of Jehovah or the re- 
sponsibility of man? There is no knowing. Xo man knows that he will believe 
to-morrow what he believes to-day. Man then can reach no positive knowledge 
to-day, and he can get no nearer to the final goal to-morrow. 

• Prologue to u Taming the Shrew." 



152 ABSOLUTE TRUTH. [SEC. LXT. 

Matter cannot be proved to exist absolutely: and mind eannot exist without 
matter. Life is a dream— a dream of a dream. But though we know that the 
dreamer is only dreaming, yet we cannot wake him : he is the slave of his 
dream — of his idea. He is governed by certain laws, which must not be vio- 
lated. The sword is only an idea, and yet to run a sword idea through a man- 
idea, is to violate a rule of the dreamer's existence, and a pain-idea, or a death- 
idea, is the consequence. There is no absolute truth capable of dernonstation,* 
just as there is no human reason that is infallible. So long as reason is iaUi- 
hle ; it can never demonstrate infallible truth. 



CONCLUSION. 



LXVI. The Christian Church must soon go down. She has long blockaded 
the pathways of science, of moral, political, social and religious philosophy. 
She has long persecuted and she continues to the extent of her power to perse- 
cute the disinterested friends of truth with a fiendish hate ; but her time is past ; 
they have now became too strong for her ; they have turned upon her and with 
all toleiance for her followers, they are determined to exterminate herself. Her 
destruction is inevitable. It may be postponed for a few years and for a few 
only. " Like f other systems, Christianity has arisen and augmented, so like 
them it will decay and perish ; as violence and deceit, not reasoning and per- 
suasion have procured its admission among mankind, so when enthusiasm has 
subsided, and time, that infallible controverter of false opinions, has involved 
its pretended evidences in the darkness of antiquity, it will become obsolete." 

The necessity of measuring every thing by the standard of the Bible, is a clog 
which must be cut off. No step forward in science or philosophy can be taken 
without the interference of the priests. When the propositions were advanced 
that the earth moved round the sun; that there were no ghosts; that devils did not 
enter the human body ; that subjects had a right to resist tyrannical rulers; that 
the earth was millions of years old ; that men were not all descended from one 

* See Appendix— Note 13. t Shelley. 



SEC. LXVI.| MACKINTOSH OK RELIGION. 153 

pair, and had lived on this planet for tens of thousands of years ; that there 
never was a universal deluge , that the mind was nothing more than a function 
of the brain — when these propositions were severally brought forward by 
learned men, the church at once interposed, said those doctrines were contrary 
to the Bible, and could not be true ; and whoever should publicly advocate 
them, should be considered a child of the devil. The propositions having been 
established, the church admitted that they were true, and with many wry faces 
proceeded, amidst the jeerings of the infidels, to fit her interpretation of the 
scriptures to the teaching of science. Thus we have Scripture-Geologists* 
Scripture-Astronomers, Scripture-Chronologists, Scripture-Egyptologists and 
Scripture-Physiologists. Heretofore the advocates of Christianity have, to a 
certain extent, compensated by numbers and zeal for their inferiority in knowl- 
edge and talent; and they were forever reinforced from the standing army of 
black dragoons,* who are scattered all over the land, and find a profitable busi^ 
ness in the miserable business of grinding over the empty ceremonies and the 
meaningless commonplaces of tradition to the church* But the church has lost 
her power to burn and exile and excommunicate her opponents, She has 
scarce the influence, though she lacks not the disposition) to excite her own 
sectaries to hate the skeptic. So long as the free-thinker could not express his 
opinions, without being persecuted by gox^ernment or the mob, there was little 
probability of a free expression of thought. But the little odium which is still 
attached by a portion of the community to free inquiry and the expression of 
doubt about Christianity, will soon be swept away, and^then it will be found 
that there are hundreds of sceptics where t^ere are tens now. Let not sincere 
Christians grieve at these expressions. They are true. They are the express 
sions of the majority of the great men of the age> The tidings are not mournful* 
There is no danger that the morality of to-morrow will be worse than that of 
to-day. Morality is not founded on superstition, notwithstanding Robespierre's 
assertion that if there were no God it would be necessary to invent one, and 
the assertion of the Christian church that if there were no hell, it would be ne* 
cessary to invent one — the fear of eternal fire being the only true conservator 
of morality, 

" Morality! is usually said to depend upon religion j but this is said in 
that low sense, in which outward conduct is considered morality; [and it is not 
true even then]. In that higher sense in which morality denotes sentiment, it 
is more exactly true to say that religion depends on morality, and springs from 
it. Virtue is not the conformity of outward actions to a rule, nor is religion 
the fear of punishment, or the hope of reward. Virtue is the state of a just, 
prudent, benevolent, firm and temperate mind. Religion is the whole of these 

* Carlyle's Life of Sterling. t Sir James Mackintosh* 



154 CONCLUSION. L SEC ' LXVI S 

sentiments, which such a mind feels towards an infinitely good and perfect be- 
ing. I am pleased with contemplations which trace piety to so pure and noble 
a source — which show good men haTe not been able to differ so much from each 
other as they imagined; that amidst all the deviations of the understanding, 
the beneficent necessity of their nature keeps alive the same sacred feelings; 
and that Turgot and Malesherbes,* so full of love for the good and fair had not 
apostatized from the true God of Socrates and Jesus." 

True religionf is in no danger, though old Christian dogmas must give way for 
a human devotion to the just, the good, the true and the beautiful — a faith 
without mysteries, and founded upon reason, free inquiry and thorough inves- 
tigation and a morality comprehensible and practicable. "Celibacy,* fast- 
ing, penance, mortification, self-denial, humility, solitude and the whole train of 
monkish virtues are every where rejected by men of sense, because they serve 
no manner of purpose, neither advance a man's fortune in the world, nor ren- 
der him a more valuable member of society, neither qualify him for the enter- 
tainment of company, nor increase his power of self enjoyment." Who will 
lament for the banishment from this world of baptism and prayer, original sin 
and redemption, predestination and grace, and last, but not least, of Hell and 
damnation ? Let them go ; they never wrought any good ; they always pre- 
vented man from having his eye single to his duty toward his fellow. The 
worship of Jehovah was never an}* thing but a ceremony, as though an all- 
wise Deity was to be approached and propitiated by the same means used to- 
ward vain and foolish princes. The popular belief in Jehovah was almost 
invariably the mere growth of ignorance and superstition. All that there was 
ever adorable in a G-od was his good qualities. Those good qualities had their 
origin in the nature of the human mind, and cannot be driven out of it. Atheism 
cannot deprive us of them, and the practical worship of them without a person- 
ality by moral actions, will probably be no worse than an empty ceremonial 
worship of a personality with them. "Human§ weakness has always con- 
founded its representations of religion with religion itself, and predicted the fall 
of religion if their own peculiar views were subjected to alteration. ' Religion 
is in danger,' they cried at the time of the Waldenses, the Hussites, of "Wick- 
liffe, of Luther; but it was only that form of religion, which bore the name of 
Catholic that was really in danger, not religion itself, which thus only gained a 
new form, beneficial to itself and to its influence, and bloomed forth in a new 
dress suitable to the times. Divine religion would indeed be a poor, paltry 
thing, if it depended for its existence ou any form of human representation, 
which must always change as the time changes. Then long since would it 
have perished." 

* Two famous French Infidels. t See Appendix, Note 14. 
$ Hume. § Westminster Review, Dec. 1645. 



SEC. LXVI.] THE GOSPEL OF NATURE. 155 

" Let * not then the mind, which is compelled to renounce its belief m mira- 
culous revelations, deem itself bound to throw aside at the same time all its 
more cherished associations. Its generous emotions and high contemplations 
may still find an occasion for exercise in the review of the interesting incidents 
which have forever consecrated the plains of Palestine ; but it may also find 
pleasure in the thought that for this exercise, no single spot of earth and no 
one page of its histoiy, furnishes the exclusive theme. Whatever dimness may 
gather from the lapse of time and the obscurity of tradition about the events of 
a distant age, these capabilities of the mind itself remain, and always will re- 
main, in full freshness and beauty. Other Jerusalems will excite the glow of 
patriotism, other Bethanies exhibit the affections of home, and other minds of 
benevolence and energy seek to hasten the approach of the kingdom of man's 
perfections. Nor can scriptures ever be wanting — the scriptures of the phy- 
sical and moral world — the book of the universe. Here the page is open and 
the language intelligible to all men ; no transcribers have been able to interpo- 
late or erase its texts ; it stands before us in the same genuineness as when 
first written ; the simplest understanding can enter with delight into criticism 
upon it ; the volume does not close, leaving us to thirst tor more, but another 
and another epistle still meets the inquisitive eye, each signed with the author's 
own hand, and bearing undoubted characters of divine inspiration." 

* HennelPs Origin of Christianity, concluding remarks. 



APPENDIX, 



References. 

Section 1. Note 1. 

I regret that I have neglected to take exact references in all cases where 1 
have made quotations ; but my purpose of making a book for the million, per- 
haps led me at first to attach too little importance to references. In most 
cases my quotations are taken from the original authors, but sometimes 1 have 
adopted quotations at second hand. Some quotations may not be literally exact, 
but in no case is any injustice done to the author, or any unfairness to the sub- 
ject under consideration* 

Where brackets are used thus [ ], they designate words inserted by the 
author among words quoted from another writer. 

Penalties of Lifting the Veil from Truth. 

Section 1, Note 2. 

Goethe's Faust. Faust declares that those who have opened their hearts to 
the world have ever been crucified and burned. 

Bacon laments that he cannot dismiss " all art and circumstance" in regard 
to the origin of existence, and exhibit the matter naked, so that every one might 
use his best judgment. 

R. W. Mackay in his work " On the Progress of the Intellect/' says : " The 
mind which has outgrown the idea of a partial God is expected to retract, and 
to submit to vulgar opinion, under pain of that reproach of atheism which, 
though never incurred by barbarians, is an objection commonly urged against 
philosophy by those intellectual barbarians, who ciing like children to the god 
whom they suppose to feed them, speak to them, and flatter them." 

" Reformers in all ages, whatever their object, have been unpitied martyrs ; 
and the multitude have evinced a savage exultation in their sacrifice. Let in 
the light upon a nest of young owls, and they cry out against the injury you 
have done them. Men of mediocrity are young owls ; when you present them 
with strong brilliant idea?, they exclaim against them as false, dangerous and 
deserving punishment." — Adventures of a Younger Son. 

" An original thinker, a reformer in moral science, will thus often appear a 
hard and insensible character. He goes beyond the feelings and associations of 
the age ; he leaves them behind him; he shocks our old prejudices; it is re- 
served for a subsequent generation to whom his views have been unfolded 



AFFEXD1X, 



157 



from infancy, and in whose minds all the interesting- associations have collected 
round them, which formerly encircled the exploded opinions, to regard his 
discoveries with unmingled 'pleasure/' — Samuel Bailey, Essay on the formation 
of Opinions, 

" The artist, [The Philosopher,] it is true, is the son of his time; but pity for 
him, if he is its pupil, or even its favorite! Let some beneficent divinity snatch 
him when a suckling from the breast of his mother, and nurse him with the 
milk of a better time, that he may ripen to his full stature, beneath a distant 
Grecian sky. And having grown to manhood let him return like a foreign 
shape to his century : not, however, to delight it by his presence, but dreadful, 
like the son of Agamemnon, to purify it," — Schiller — Translation by Carlyle. 

In 1624, at the request of the University of Paris, and especially of the Sor-- 
bonne, persons were forbidden by an arret of Parliament, on pain of death, to 
hold or to teach any maxim contrary to ancient and approved authors, or to 
enter into any debate, but such as should be approved by the doctors of the 
faculty of theology. 

" Speedy end to superstition, — a gentle one if you can contrive it, but an end. 
What ean it profit any mortal to adopt locutions and imaginations which do 
not correspond to fact; which no sane mortal can deliberately adopt in his soul 
as true; which the most orthodox of mortals ean only, and 'this after infinite 
and essentially impious effort to put out the eyes of his mind, persuade himself 
to believe that he believes ? Away with it ; in the name of God come out of 
it, all true men I" — Cariyle } Life of John Sterling. 

" The observer must be blind indeed, who does not perceive the vastness of 
the scale on which speculative principles,, both right and wrong, have operated 
upon the present condition of mankind ; or who does not now feel and acknow- 
ledge how deeply the morals and the happiness of private life, as well as the 
ord.r of political society, are involved in the final issue of the contest between 
true and false philosophy,' 7 — Dugald Stewart. 

The Dominion of Reason in Matters of Religion, 

Section II, Note 3. 

The Church Opposed to Reason, 

It is a notorious fact that the Christian Church has always been bitterly 

opposed to the use of reason for the purpose of questioning or investigating the 

truth of the Bible. 

The Apostles Denounced Reason. 
" The carnal mind is enmity against God," Rom. VIII, 7, 

"Avoid oppositions of science, falsely so called, which some professing have 
erred from the faith." 1 Tim. VI. 20. 

" The things of the Spirit of God are foolishness unto the natural man." 1 
Cor. II. 14. 

"Beware, lest any man spoil you through philosophy." Col. II. 8. 

The Fathers of the Church Denounced Reason. 
The modern Catholic Church denounces the use of reason, and established 
bloody inquisitions to suppress the progress of free thought. 



158 APPENDIX. 

The leaders of the Reformation denounced the use of reason, if used for the 
purpose of going any further than they had gone; although, of course, it was 
all right if used to discover the fallibility and wickedness of the Catholic 
Church. 

" Divine things, since they are beyond reason, appear contrary to reason." — 

Luther. 

" There is nothing more hostile to faith than reason." — Luther. 
"Reason is the bride of the devil." — Lutlier. 

"Build not your faith in the Divine Word on the sand of human reason." — 

Calvin. 

"It is folly to think of God according to the dictates of our mad, dazzled and 
corrupt reason." — Lutlier. 

The same idea was also expressed by great men a century later, who sym- 
pathised with the Reformation. 

" The principles of theology are above nature and reason." — Pascal. 

" Tn theology we balance authorities, in philosophy we weigh reasons." — 
Kepler. 

The leaders of the Protestant Church in our own day, as a body, are bitterly 
opposed to doubt or investigation of the truth of their doctrines. One citation 
must be sufficient in support of a fact already sufficiently notorious. 

"It behoves us to make an entire and unconditional surrender of our minds 
to all the duty and to all the information which the Bible sets before us." — 

Chalmers. 

Bayle, a sceptic, thus expresses the doctrine of the Church: — "The first 
thing Jesus Christ requires is faith and submission. This is commonly his first 
precept, and also of his apostles:— ' Follow me, believe, and thou shalt be 
saved.' (Luke V. 27 ; IX. 59 ; Acts XVI. 31). Now that faith which was re- 
quired was not obtained by a train of philosophical discussions and long rea- 
soning, but was the gift of Cod, a pure grace of the Holy Ghost, which com- 
monly fell on ignorant persons. (Mat, XI. 25). It was not even produced in 
the apostles by their reflecting on the holiness of the life of Jesus Christ, and 
the excellenc} ; of his doctrines and miracles. They stood in need of a revela- 
tion from God himself to know that he, whose disciples they were, was his 
eternal son." (Mat, XVI. 17). 

Hobbes, another sceptic, says very wittily : — " When anything written in 
the Bible is too hard for examination," it is our duty to captivate our under- 
standings to the words, and not to labor in sifting out a philosophical truth by 
logic, of such mysteries as are not comprehensible, nor fall under any rule of 
natural science, for it is with the mysteries of our religion as with the whole- 
some pills for the sick, which swallowed whole, have the virtue to cure, but 
chewed, are for the most part cast up again without effect," 

Modem Churchmen in favor of Free Inquiry. 
A few of the best modern Churchmen have been in favor of free inquiry; 
but the Church deserves little credit for, and certainly will derive little benefit 
rom, such opinions. 



APPENDIX. 159 

"We need not desire a better evidence that any man is in the wrong than to 
hear him declare against reason, and thereby acknowlege that reason is against 
him." — Archbishop Tillotson. 

" What I most crave to see, and what still appears no impossible dream, is 
inquiry and belief going together." — Dr. Arnold, 

" I shndder at the consequences of fixing the great proofs of religion upon 
any other basis than that of the widest investigation, and the most honest state- 
ment of facts." — Rev. Sydney Smith. 

" With regard to Christianity itself, I creep toward the light, even though it 
takes me away from the more nourishing warmth. Yea, I should do so, even 
if the li^ht made its way through a rent in the wall of the temple." — S. T. 
Coleridge. 

" Let her [truth] and falsehood grapple ! Who ever knew truth put to the 
worse in a free and open encounter?" — Milton. 

" One who has an aversion to doubt, and is anxious to make up his mind, 
and to come to some conclusion on every question that is discussed, must be 
content to rest many of his opinions on very slight grounds." — Archbishop 
Whately. 

"The love of truth, a deep thirst for it, a deliberate purpose to seek it, and 
hold it fast, may be considered as the very foundation of human culture and 
dignity." — Wm. E. Channing. 

"There is a general obligation common to all Christians, of searching into 
the origin and evidences of our religion." — Dr. Middleton. 

Philosophers on Reason in Religion. 
" 0, my dear Kepler, how I wish we could have one hearty laugh together ! 
Here at Padua, is the principal professor of Philosophy, whom I have repeatedly 
and urgently requested to look at the moon and planets, through my glass, 
which he pertinaciously refuses to do. Why are you not here? What shouts 
of laughter we should have at this glorious folly." — Galileo. 

" To steal into heaven, by the modern method of sticking, ostrich-like, your 
head into fallacies on earth, equally as by the ancient and by all conceivable 
methods, is forever forbidden." — Carlyle's Life of Sterling. 

"Whenever obsequious reverence is substituted for bold inquiry y truth, if 
she is not already at hand, will never be attained." — Hallam 

"He who dare not reason is a slave; he who will not is a bigot ; he who can- 
not is a fool." — Drummond. 

"True faith is a belief in things probable." — Mackay. 

" The intellectual worth and dignity of man are measured, not by the truth 
which he possesses, or fancies that he possesses, but by the sincere and honest 
pains he has taken to discover truth. This it is that invigorates his mind; and 
by exercising the mental springs,' preserves them in full activity. Possession 
makes us quiet, indolent, proud. If the Deity held in his right hand all truth, 
and in his left only the ever active impulse, the fond desire, and longing after 
truth, coupled with the condition of constantly erring, aud should oner me the 



160 APPENDIX. 

"choice, I should humbly turn towards the left, and say ' Father, give roe this'j 
pure truth is fit for thee alone.' " — Leasing. — Translator unknown. 

"An opinion, though ever so true and certain to one man, cannot be trans- 
fused into another as true and certain, by any other way but by way of opening 
his Understanding, and assisting him so to order his conceptions, that he may 
find the reasonableness of it within himself" — Wollaston. 

" In entering upon any scientific pursuit, [or philosophic investigation,] one 
of the student's first endeavors ought to be to prepare his mind for the reception, 
of truth, by dismissing, or at least loosening his hold on all such crude and 
hastily adopted notions respecting all the objects and relations, he is about to 
examine, as may tend to embarrass or mislead him ; ; and to strengthen himself 
by something of an effort and a resolve for the unprejudiced admission of any 
conclusion which shall appear to be supported by careful observation and lo= 
gical argument, even should it prove adverse to notions he may have previously 
formed tor himself, or taken up without examination on the credit of others. 
Such an effort is in fact, a commencement of that intellectual discipline which 
forms one of the most important ends of all science. It is the first movement 
of approach toward that state of mental purity, which alone can fit us for a full 
and steady perception of moral beauty as well as physical adaptation. It is 
'the euphrasy and rue with which we must purge our sight before we can receive 
and contemplate, as they are^ the lineaments of truth and nature," — Herschel— 
Introduction to Astronomy-. 

'" It Was not simply to arrive at a conclusion by a certain measure of plausi- 
ble premise — and then to proclaim it as an authoritative dogma, silencing or 
disparaging all objections — that Grecian speculation aspired. To unmask not 
only positive falsehood, but even affirmation without evidence, exaggerated com 
fideuce in what was only doubtful, and show of knowledge without the reality ; 
to look at a problem on all sides and set forth all the difficulties attending its 
solution, to take account of deductions from the affirmative evidence, even in 
the case of conclusions accepted as true upon the balance — all this will be found 
pervading the march of their greatest thinkers. As a condition of all progres- 
sive philosophy it is not less essential that the grounds of negation should be 
fully exposed than the grounds of affirmation?'— George Grote — History of 
G-reec& 

" To ask for nothing but results, to decline the labor of verification) to be sa- 
tisfied with a ready-made stock of established positive arguments as proof, and 
to decry the doubter or negative reasoned who starts newdifflculties, as a com- 
mon enemy, — this is a proceeding sufficiently common in ancient as well as 
in modern times. But it is nevertheless an abnegation of the dignity and even 
of the functions of speculative philosophy," — G-rote,— History of Greece. 

"The strict rule of scientific, [and philosophic,] scrutiny exacts according to 
modern philosophers in matters of inductive, [and speculative,] reasoning an 
exclusive homage. It requires that we should close our eyes against all pre- 
sumptive and extrinsic evidence, and abstract our minds from all considera- 
tions, [such as traditional authority and prejudices of education,] not derived 
from the matters of fact which bear directly on the matter in question. The 
maxim we have to follow in such controversies is fat justitia, mat ccdum, [let 
us know the truth, even if it should send us to hell.] In fact what is actually 
true is always most desirable to know, whatever consequences may arise from 
its admission*"— Pritcliard*— Natural History of 31an, Section II 



APPENDIX. 161 

r *' Ko man is accountable for the opinion he may form, the conclusion at which 
be may arrive, provided that he has taken the pains to inform h s mind and fix 
his judgment. But for the conduct of his understanding he certainly is resp. m- 
sibte. He does more than err if be negligently proceeds in his inquiry ; he 
does more than err rf he allows any motive to sway his mind, save the constant 
and single desire of finding the truth; he does more than err, if he sutlers the 
least influence of temper or of we.k feeling to warp his judgment ; he does more 
than err, if he listens rather to ridicule than to reason, unless it be that 
ridicule which springs from the contemplation of gross and manifest absurdity, 
and which is in truth argument and not ribaldry." — Brougham — Life of 
Voltaire. 

" Divest yourself of all bias in favor of novelty and singularity of opinion. 
Indulge them in any other subject rather than that of religion. It is too im- 
portant, and the consequences of error may be too serious. On the one hand, 
shake oifall fears and servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely 
crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, 
every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God ; because 
if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of 
blindfolded fear. You will naturally examine first the religion of your own 
country c Read the Bible then as you would read Livy or Tacitus. The facts 
which are within the ordinary course of nature, you will believe on the authority 
of the writer, as you would do those of the same kind in Livy and Tacitus. 
The testimony of the writer weighs in their favor, in one scale, and their not 
being against the laws of nature does not weigh against them in the other, But 
those facts of the Bible which contradict the laws of nature must be examined 
with more care, and under a variety of phases. Here you must recur to the pre- 
tensions of the writer to inspiration from God. Examine upon w hat evidence 
his pretensions are founded, and whether that evidence is so strong, that its 
falsehood would be more improbable tnan a change in the laws uf nature, in 
the case he relates. For example in the books of Joshua we are told, the sun 
stood still several hours. Were we to read that fact in Lixy or Tacitus, we 
should class it with their showers of blood, speaking of statues, beasts, <£c. But 
it is said the writer of that book was inspired. Examine, theielore, candidly what 
evidence there is of his having been inspired. The pretension is entitled to 
your inquiry, because millions believe it. On the other hand you are astronomer 
enough to know how contrary it is to the law of nature, that a body revolving 
on its axis, as the earth does, should have stopped [suddenly], should not by 
that sudden stoppage have prostrated animals, trees, buildings, and should 
after a certain time have resumed its revolutions, and that also without a gen- 
eral prostration. Is this amstof the earth's motion, or the evidence which 
affirms it, most within the law of probability ? You will next read the New Tes- 
tament. It is the history of a personage called Jesus. Keep in your eve the 
opposite pretensions ; first, of those who say he was begotten by God, born of a 
virgin, suspended and reversed the laws of nature at will, and" ascended bodily 
into heaven; and secondly, of those who say he was a man of illegitimate birth, 
of a benevolent heart, enthusiastic mind, who set out without pretensions, 
ended in believing them, and was punished capitally for sedition, by being gib- 
beted according to the Roman law. * * * Do not be frightened from this 
inquiry by any fear of its consequences. * * * In fine, 1 repeat, you must 
lay aside all prejudices on both sides, and neither believe nor reject any 1 lung, 
because any other persons or description of persons have rejected or believed it! 
Your own reason is the only oracle given you by heaven, and you are answer- 
6 



162 APPENDIX. 

able, not for the rightness, but for the uprightness of jour decisions."— Thoma* 
Jefferson.— Letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 17S7. 

The Origin of Hebrew and Christian Doctrines* 

Section XXII. Note 4. 

i^" The favor of the g^ds was believed to be obtained by means similar to 
those which are most efficacious with powerful mortals— homage and tribute, 
or in the language of religion, worship and sacrifice. * * * The image of* 
earthlv kings applied to the heavenly powers, suggested the persuasion that 
the efficacy of a sacrifice depended on its value, and that the feeling which 
prompted the offering was not merely to be expressed, but to be measured bj 
it. This persuasion was cherished by two popular prejudices; by the notion 
that the gods were capable of envy and jealousy, which men might allay by 
costly profusion in their gifts, and' by the view taken of the sacrifice as a ban- 
quet for the god , the more agreeable in proportion as it was rich and splendid." 
TUrlwaU— History of Greece, chapter VI, 

" It is incontestible that the Bramins have formed their people to such a 
degree of gentleness, courtesy, temperance and chastity, or at least have so far 
confirmed^them in these virtues, that Europeans frequently appear in comparison 
with them as beastly, drunken, or mad. Their air and language are unres= 
trainedlv elegant, their behavior friendly, their persons clean, their way of 
life simple and harmless. Their children are oducated without severity; 'yet 
thev are not destitute of knowledge, and still less of quiet industry or nicely 
imitative art. * * * The leading idea the Bramins entertain of God is 
grand and beautiful ; their morality is pure and elevated ; and even their 
fables, when scanned by the eye of reason, are refined and charming." — J. G. 
Herder— Philosophy of History. 

"Socrates, and Confucius, Plato, Cicero, and Zoroaster, agree unanimously 
in what constitutes clear understanding and just morals; in spite of their va- 
rious differences, they have all labored to one point on wh ch our whole species 
re*t* As the wanderer enjoys no greater delight than when he everywhere 
discovers even unexpectedly, 'the traces of a thinking, feeling mind, like Us 
own so are we delighted, when in the history of our species, the echo of all 
ages' and nations reverberates nothing but truth and benevolence towards 
m a n ;W. G. Herder— Philosophy of History. 

u If a name were to be given to impartiality and firm resolve, to indefatigable 
activity in words and deeds and a determinate ardent pursuit of victory or 
honor—if to that cool courage, which peril cannot daunt, misfortune cannot 
bend and success cannot intoxicate— it must be that of Roman fortitude. Many 
T)er c ons even of the lowest order in that state, displayed this virtue in so con- 
spicuous p manner that we, particularly in our youth, when we view the Ro- 
mans chiefly on their brilliant side, honor such personages as great departed 
soir.t* Their generals stride like giants from one quarter of the world to an- 
other and bear The fate of nations in their prompt and powerful hands."— Herder, 

•* The morality of the Z g d-Avesta is entitled to praise ; purity of word, 



APPENDIX. 163 

action and thought is repeatedly inculcated. To multiply the human species, 
increase its happiness, and prevent evil are the general duties inculcated by 
Z >roaster to his disciples; agriculture and the multiplication of useful arts are 
particularly recommended to them. ' He,' says Zoroaster, ' who sows the 
ground with diligence, acquires a greater stock of religious merit, than he could 
gain by 10,000 prayers.' The disciple of Z roaster is enjoined to pardon in- 
juries, to honor his parents and the king whose rights are derived from Ormuzd, 
to respect old age, to observe general gentleness of manners and to practice 
universal benevolence. — Bailer — Hbrce Biblicce. 

" Well-doing," said Socrates, "is the noblest pursuit of man. The best man 
and the most beloved by the Gods is he who as a husbandman, performs well 
the duties of husbandry ; as a surgeon those of medical a7*t; in political life, his 
duty toward the commonwealth. But the man who does nothing well, is 
neither useful nor agreeable to the Gods." 

" The superior man looks at his situation and acts accordingly. H© concerns 
not himself with what is beyond his station. If he possess riches, he acts as a 
rich man ought to do. If poor, he acts as a poor man ought to act. To a 
stranger he acts the part of a stranger. If a sufferer, he acts as a sufferer ought 
to do. The superior man enters into no situation where he is not himself. If 
he hold a superior situation, he does not treat with contempt those below him. 
If he occupy an inferior station, he does not court the favor of his superiors; he 
corrects himself and blames not others. He feels no dissatisfaction. He 
grumbles not with Heaven above; he feels no resentment with man below. 
Hence the superior man dwells at ease, calmly waiting the will of Heaven. But 
the mean man walks in dangerous paths, and covets what he has no right to 
obtain." — Confucius. 

" Alas I have never seen one who loves virtue as we love beauty." — Confucius. 

" To cultivate virtue with undeviating singleness of intention, without regard 
to a long or short life, is the way to fulfil the divine decree." — Mencius, a Chi- 
nese Philosopher, (500, B. C.) 

"Let us vigorously exert ourselves to act toward others as we wish them to 
do to us." — Mencius. 

"The genius of Plato, informed by his own moderation, or by the traditional 
knowledge of the priests of Egypt, had ventured to explore the mysterious na- 
ture of the Deity. When he had elevated his mind to the sublime contempla- 
tion of the first' self-existent, necessary cause of the universe, the Athenian 
sage was incapable of conceiving how the simple unity of his essence could ad- 
mit the infinite variety of distinct and successive ideas which compose the 
model of the intellectual world ; how a Being purely incorporeal could execute 
that perfect model and mould with a plastic hand the rude and independent 
chaos. The vain hope of extricating himself from these difficulties, which must 
ever oppress the feeble powers of the human mind might induce Plato to con- 
sider the divine nature under the threefold modifications of the First cans ', the 
reason or Logos, and the soul or sprit of the universe. His poetical imagina- 
tion sometimes fixed and animited these metaphysical abstractions; the three 
archical or original principles were represented in the Platonic system as three 
Gods united with each other by a mysterious and ineffable generation ; and the 
Logos was particularly considered under the more accessible character of the 



164 AWMflllX- 

Son of an eternal Father and the creator and Governor of the World. Sucfs 
appear to have been the secret doctrines which were cautiously whispered in 
the gardens of the Academy, and which according to the more recent disciples- 
of Plato could not be understood till after an assiduous study for thirty years.** 
— Gibbon, Char). XXL — Decline and f 

In a note to this chapter Gibbon says, "The modern guides who lead me to 
the knowledge of the Platonic system are Cudworth, (Intellectual Svstem, pp. 
563 — 620,) Basna^e, (Hist, of Jews, L, IV. C. 4, pp. 53—86.) Leclerc, (Epist. 
Crit. VII. pp. 194—209,) and Brucker, (Hist. Phil V. I. pp. 675— 706. ) 

In a note affixed to this chapter, Guizot says that according to the Zend° 
A vesta, it is by the word more ancient than the world that Ormuzd created the 
Universe. He also says that rhiio personified the Logos as the ideal archetype 
of the world. Gibbon gives it as his opinion thai Phiio wrote before the time 
of Jesus. 

" Tsze Kung asked if there was any one word which expresses the proper 
conduct of one's whole life. Confucius [500 B. C] replied, will not the word 
shoo [love ?] do it, i. e. do not to others what you do not wish them to do to 
Y0U ." — The Four Books, XV. 23. — Translated by the Rev. David Collie. 

Confucius said, " I compile and transmit to posterity, but write not anything 
uew. I believe and love the ancients, taking Laou Pang for my pattern." — Ibid* 
VII. 1. 

Some one asked Diogenes the way to be revenged on an enemy? The cynic 
replied : u Become more virtuous." — Plat, de auoLj^oet. Quoted by Barihelemy. 

Socrates said : It was not permitted to return evil for evil, — Plato in C 
Quoted by Barihelemy. 

tl However much we may be resolved to charge their predictions with collu- 
sion and imposture, there are yet specimens of their [the Roman oracles] moral 
doctrines preserved which exhibit a purity and wisdom scarcely to be surpass- 
ed/ —Dr. Arnold. See Cicero de Oficiis, III. 28, 29. 

A. W. Schlegel says we have express testimony that the division of time into 
weeks originated with the Egyptians. 

"If we addressed a Mongol or a Thibetan this question, * Who is Buddha?' 
he replied instantly, ' The Savior of men.' The marvellous birth oi Buddha, big 
life and his instructions contain a great number of moral truths and dogmas 
professed in Christianity, and which we need not be surprised to find also 
among other nations, since these truths are traditional and have always 
belonged to the heritage of humanity. There must be among a Pagan people 
more or less of Christian truth, in proportion as they have been more or less 
faithful in preserving the deposit of primitive traditions. From the concordant 
testimony of Indian, Chinese, Thibetan, Mongol and Cingalese books, we may 
place the birth of Buddha about the year 960 before Christ." — Hue s Journey 
through the Chinese Empire. Ohup. V. 

" The Boodhists of the west, accepting Christianity on its fir&t announcement, 
at once introduced the rites and observances which for centuries had already 
existed in India. From that country Christianity derived its monarchical 
institutions, its form of ritual and church service, its councils or convocations 
to settle schisms on points of faith ; its worship of relics, and working of 
miracles through them ; and much of the discipline and dress of the clergy, 



AJp£r>,T)is. 165 

even to the shared heads of the monks and friars." — Prinsep — Quoted in 
Pococke's India in Greece. 

" Piety, obedience to superiors, resignation in misfortune, charity, hospi- 
tality, filial, parental and conjugal affection, are among the distinguishing 
characteristics of the Hindoos*" — Faroes — Oriental Memoirs, 

" The philosophic observers m Greece boasted of the sense of personal dignity 
as the characteristic of the Greeks as distinguished from Barbarians. — Grate. 

" Where is to be found theology more orthodox, or philosophy more pro- 
found, than in the introduction to the Shasta'? 'God is one creator of one 
universal sphere, without beginning, without end. God governs all the creation 
by a general providence, resulting from his eternal designs. Search not the 
essence and the nature of the eternal, who is one; your research will be vain 
and presumptuous. It is enough that day and night you adore his power, his 
wisdom and his goodness, in his works. The eternal willed in the fullness 
of time to communicate of his essence and of his splendor to beings capable of 
perceiving it. They as yet existed not. The eternal willed and they were. 
He created Birma, Vistnou, and Siv.' These doctrines — sublime if ever there 
were any sublime — Pythagoras learned in India and taught them to Zaleucus 
and his other disciples," — John Adams — Letter to Thomas Jefferson, Deo. 
25, 1313. 

"A spirit of sublime devotion, of benevolence to mankind, and of amiable 
tenderness to all sentient creatures pervades the whole work [The Institutes of 
Menu] ; the style of it has a certain austere majesty, that sounds like the lan- 
guage of leg : slation and extorts a respectful awe : the sentiments of indepen- 
dence on all beings but God, and the harsh admonitions even to kings, are 
truly noble; and the many panegyrics on the Gayatu, the mother, as it is 
called, of the Veda, prove the author to have adored (not the visible, material 
sun, but) that divine and incomparably greater light, to use the words of the 
most venerable text in the Indian Scripture, which illumines all, delights all, 
from which all proceed, to which all must return, and which alone can irradiate 
(not our visual organs merely, but our souls and) our intellects." — Sir Wm. 
Jones. 

"The Samaritans in Aram were Buddhists, (see Johann von Mueller's Welt- 
Gescbichte,) as were likewise the Essenes in Palestine ; at least they were so in 
their esoteric doctrines, though subsequently they conformed externally to the 
Mosaic and afterwards to the Christian svstem. The Essenes subsequently 
joined the Gnostics. ********** 

The Gnostics were divided into two chief sects — the Asiatic and the Egyptian 
[Theraepeutse?]. The former were properly Buddhists, who for the most part 
adopted the outward forms of Christianity, because, in accordance with their 
own tenets, they considered Jesus to be a Buddha, who had appeared on earth. 

* * * * * * * * * * X * * * 

The Druids, too, in ancient Britain were Buddhists: they admitted the me- 
tempsychosis, the pre-existence of souls, and their return to the realms of uni- 
versal space. They had a triad of gods, consisting, like that of the Buddhists, 
of a creator, a sustainer, and a destroyer. The Druids constituted a sacerdotal 
order, which reserved to itself the exclusive piivilege of expounding the myste- 
ries of religion. Their wisdom was so renowned that Lucan says in his epic 
poem, ' If ever the knowledge of the gods has come down to earth, it is to the 



166 APPENDIX. 

Druids of Britain.' They afterwards, in Caesar's time, propagated their doc- 
trines in Gaul, whence they spread among the Celtic tribes in Spain, Germany 
and in the Cimbrian Peninsula. The ban of the Druids was as terrible as that 
of the Bramins ; even the king, whom it smote, fell like grass before the scythe. 
The Druids must have obtained their doctrine through traffic of the Phoenicians 
with Britain, the latter people having been of the Buddhist creed. Nay, even 
in the far North did Buddhism make its way; for it cannot be denied that the 
doctrine of Odin is an echo of that of Buddha. The Scandinavians had their 
divine trinity of the creator, sustainer, and destroyer." — Count Bjomsterna. 
— Quoted in the Foreign Quarterly Review, Jan. 1844. 

Miracles not Recorded in the Bible. 
Section XXIV. Note. 5. 
Miraculous Cure by Vespasian. 
"Of all the miraculous cures on record, the best attested are those of the 
blind man and the paralytic man, whom Vespasian cured of their ailments. 
These miracles were done in Alexandria, before a multitude of people, Romans, 
Greeks, and Egyptians, and the Emperor was at the time on his throne. He 
did not seek popularity, of which the emperor of Rome, firmly established on 
his seat, had no need. The two unfortunate men threw themselves in his way, 
and begged to be cured. He blushed for them and ridiculed their prayer. He 
said that such a cure was beyond the power of man : but the two unfortunates 
insisted, and asserted that the god Serapis had appeared to them and assured 
them that they should be cured by the miraculous power of Vespasian. Finally 
he consented to utter the words, but he did so without any expectation of suc- 
cess, and on the instant the blind man was restored to see, and the lame man 
to walk without imperfection. Alexandria, Egypt, and the whole empire were 
filled with «.he fame of the event ; and the record of the miracle was placed in 
the archives oi State, and preserved in all the contemporary histories. Never- 
theless this miracle is now believed by nobody, because nobody has any inte- 
rest in maintaining it." — Voltaire. — Essai sur les Miracles. 

Miracle at Tipasa. 
"Tipasa, a maritime colouy of Mauritania, was purely orthodox, and had 
braved the fury of the Donatists and the tyranny of the Ariaus. Their diso- 
bedience exasperated the cruelty of Hunneric ; a military count was dispatched 
from Carthage to Tipasa ; he collected the Catholics in the forum, and in the 
presence of the whole province, deprived the guilty of their right hands and of 
their tongues. But the holy Confessors continued to speak without tongues; 
and this miracle is attested by Victor, an African bishop, who published a 
history of the persecution within two years after the event. ' If any one' says 
Victor ' should doubt the truth, let him repair to Constantinople, and listen to 
the clear and perfect language of Restitutus, the sub-deacon, one of these glo- 
rious sunVers, who is now lodged in the palace of the Emperor Zeno, and is 
respected by toe devott Empress.' At Constantinople, we are astonished to 
find a cool, learned, and unexceptionable witness, without interest and without 
passion. JEieas of Gaza, a Platonic Philosopher, has accurately described his 
own observations on these African sufferers :— ' 1 saw them myself, 1 heard 
them speak, I diligently inquired by what means such an articulate voice could 
be formed without any organ of speech ; I used my eyes to examine the report 
of my ear ; I opened their mouths, and saw that their whole tongues had been 



APPENDIX, 16'7 

completely torn away by the roots — an operation which the physicians gene- 
rally suppose to be mortal.' The testimony of ^Eneas of Gaza might be con- 
firmed by the superfluous evidence of the Emperor Justinian) in a perpetual 
edict; of Count Marcellinus in his chronicle of the times; and of Pope Gregory 
the First, who had resided at Constantinople, as the minister of the Roman 
Pontiff. They all lived within the compass of a century; and they all appeal 
to their personal knowledge, or to the public notor.ety for the truth of the 
miracle, which was repeated in several instances, displayed on the greatest 
theatre of the world, and submitted during a series of years to the calm exa= 
mination of the senses." — Gibbon — Decline and Fall, cJiap. XXXVII. 

Miracles at the Tomb of Abbe Paris. 

The miracles reported to have been done about 1650. A. D., at the tomb of 
Abbe Paris, the Jansenist, in the city of Paris, are famous in history. The Rev. 
Dr. Middletou gives the following account of them : 

"Within six years after his [Abbe Paris': death, the confident report of 
miracles wrought at his tomb, began to alarm not only the city of Paris, but 
the whole nation ; while infiuite crowds were continually pressing to th* place 
and proclaiming the benefits received from the saint, nor could all the power of 
the government give a check to the rapidity of this superstition, till b} T closing 
the tomb within a wall, they effectually obstructed all access to it." 

" This expedient though it put an end to the external worship of the saint, 
could not shake the r-redit of his miracles ; distinct accounts of which were 
carefully drawn up, and dispersed among the people, with an attestation of 
them, much more strong and authentic, than what has ever been alleged for the 
miracles of any other age since the days of the apostles. Mons. de Mont= 
geron, a person of eminent rank in Paris, (Counsellor to the Parliament), 
published a select number of them, in a pompous volume in quarto, which he 
dedicated to the king, and presented to him in person, being induced to the 

Eublication of them, as he declares,, by the incontestible evidence of the facts; 
y which he himself, a libertine and professed deist, became a sincere convert 
to the Christian faith. But, besides the collection of M. de Montgeron, several 
other collections were made, containing in the whole above a hundred miracles, 
which are all published together in three volumes, with their original vouchers, 
certificates, affidavits and letters annexed to each of them at full length. 

" The greatest part of these miracles were employed in the cure of desperate 
diseases in their last and deplored state, and after all human remedies had for 
many years been tried upon them in vain ; but the patients no sooner addressed 
themselves to the tomb of this saint, than the most inveterate cases, and com- 
plications of palsies, apoplexies, and dropsies, and even blindness and lameness, 
&c, were either instantly cured or greatly relieved, and within a short time 
after, wholly removed. "All which cures were performed in the church yard of 
St. Medard, in the open view of the people, and with so general a belief of the 
finger of God in them that many inndels, debauchees, schismatics, and heretics 
are said to have been converted by them to the Catholic faith. And the reality 
of them is attested by some of the principal physicians and surgeons in France, 
as well as the clergy* of the first dignity, several of whom were eye-witnesses of 
them, who presented a verbal process (j?roces-verbal) to each of the archbishops, 
with a petition signed by above twenty cures or rectors of the parishes of Paris, 
desiring that they might be authentically registered, and solemnly published to 
the people as true miracles." 

On the wall erected about the tomb to keep away the crowd jmd stop the 
miracles, some scoffer stuck up a notice, 



168 aFfessix 

" De par le roi, il est defendu a Dieu 
De faire de miracles dans ce lieu." 
(The king has ordered that God shall perform no more miracles in this place.) 

''Miracles, most doubtful on the spot and at the moment, will be received 
with implicit faith at a convenient distance of time and space." — Gibbon, — De* 
dine and Fall, Chap. L VII. See an example there cited, 

Cicero says of the Pythian oracle, "When men began to be less credulous ; 
its power vanished." 

" Were miracles really indispensable for religious improvement and console 
tion, heaven forbid there should be any limits to our credulity." — MacJcay — 
Progress of the Intellect* 

Miraculous Cure of Pascal's Niece. 

"Mademoiselle Perrier was the niece of Blaize Pascal. She was a child in 
her eleventh year, and a scholar residing in the monastery of Port Royal. For 
three years and a half she had been afflicted with a fistula lachrymalis. The 
adjacent bones had become carious, and the most loathsome ulcers disfigured 
her countenance. All remedies had been tried in vain j the medical faculty had 
exhausted their resources. ***'-* Xow it came to pass that M. de la 
Potherie, a Parisian ecclesiastic, and an assiduous collector of relics, had pos= 
sessed himself of one of the thorns from the crown worn by Christ just previous 
to the crucifixion. Great had been the curiosity of the various convents to see 
it, aud the ladies of Port Royal had earnestly solicited the privilege. Accord- 
ingly on the 24th of March, in the year 1656, a solemn procession of nuns, no- 
vices and scholars moved along the aisles of the monastic church, chanting ap- 
propriate hymns, aud each one in her turn kissiug the holy relic. When the 
turn of Mademoiselle Perrier arrived, she, by the advice of the school mistress, 
touched her diseased eye with the thorn, not doubting but that it would effect 
a cure. She regained her room and her malady was gone. The cure was in- 
stantaneous and complete. * * * All Paris rang with the story. It reached 
the ear of thri Queen Mother. By her command M. Felix, the principal surgeon 
to the king, investigated and confirmed the uarrative. * * * The greatest 
genius, the most profound scholar, and the most eminent advocate of that age, 
all possessing the most ample meaus of knowledge, all carefully investigated, 
all admitted, and all defended with their pens, the miracle of the Holy Thorn, 
Europe at that time produced no three men more profoundly conversant with 
the laws of the material world, with the laws of the human mind, and with the 
municipal law, than Paseal, Arnauld and Le Maitre ; aud they were all sincere 
and earnest believers. Yet our Protestant incredulity utterly rejects both the 
tale itself and the inferences drawn from it, and but for such mighty names 
might yield to the temptation of regarding it as too contemptible for serious no- 
tice." — Edinburgh Beview, July 184L 

"An historian ought not to dissemble the difficulty of denning with preci= 
sion the limits of that happy period, exempt from error and from deceit, to which 
we might be disposed to extend the gift of supernatural powers. From the 
first of the fathers to the last of the Popes, a succession of bishops, of saints, of 
martyrs, and of miracles is continued without interruption; and the progress 
of superstition was so gradual and almost imperceptible, that we know not in 
what particular link we should break the chain of tradition.— Gibbon. 



APPENDIX. 169 

See Forbes Oriental Memoirs, vol II. ch. IV. for an account of the success of 
several wonderful Hindoo prophecies. 

Prophecy of Josephine's Greatness. 

Memes, in his biography of the Empress Josephine, thus records the famous 
prophecy of Josephine's royal destiny: " On one of these occasions, an incident 
occurred, the only one recorded of her early years, which exercised an influence, 
at least over her imagination, almost to the latest hour of her existence. The 
following is the narrative, in her own words, as she long afterward related the 
circumstances to the ladies of her court: — 

"One day some time before my first marriage, while taking my usual walk, I 
observed a number of negro girls assembled round an old woman, engaged in 
telling their fortunes. I drew near to observe their proceeding.-. The old 
Sibyl, on beholding me, uttered a loud exclamation, and almost by force seized 
my hand. She appeared to be under the greatest agitation. Amused at these 
absurdities, as 1 thought them, I allowed her to proceed, saying, ' So you dis- 
cover something extraordinary in my destiny?' * Yes.'* * Is happiness' or mis- 
fortune to be my lot?' 'Misfortune. Ah,' stop! and happiness too.' 'You 
take care not to commit yourself, my dame; your oracles are not the most in- 
telligible.' 'I am not permitted to Vender them more clear,' said the woman, 
raising her eyes with a mysterious expression towards heaven. ' But to the 
point,' replied I, for my curiosity began to be excited; ' what read you concern- 
ing me in futurity?' 'What do I see in the future? You will not believe me 
if I speak.' ' Yes, indeed, I assure you. Come my good mother what am I to 
fear and hope?' ' On your own head be it then ; listen ! You will be married 
soon ; that union will not be happy ; you will become a widow, and then — then 
you will be Queen of France! Some happy years will be yours; but you will 
die in a hospital, amid civil commotion.' " 

How the Stories of Miracles ivere Forged. 
"The passage concerning Jesus Christ, which was inserted into the text of 
Josephus, between the time of Origen and that of Eusebius, may furnish an 
example of no vulgar forgery. The accomplishment of the prophecies, the 
virtues, miracles and resurrection of Jesus are distinctly related." — Gibbon — 
Decline and Fall, Chap. XVI. No. 86. Not contradicted ly Milman or Guizot. 

"The monks of succeeding [the dark] ages, who in their peaceful solitudes, 
entertained themselves with diversifying the deaths and sufferings of the primi- 
tive martyrs, have frequently invented torments of a very refined and ingenious 
nature. In particular it has pleased them to suppose that the zeal of the Ro- 
man magistrates, disdaining every consideration of moral virtue or public de- 
cency, endeavored to seduce those whom they could not vanquish, and that by 
their orders the most brutal violence was offered to those whom they found it 
impossible to seduce. It is related that pious females who were prepared to 
despise death, were sometimes condemned to a more severe trial, and called 
upon to determine whether they set a higher value on their religion or on their 
chastity. The youths to whose licentious embraces they were abandoned, 
received a solemn exhortation from the judge, to exert their r n us 

efforts to maintain the honor of Venus against the impious Virgin who refused 
to burn incense on her altars. Their violence however was commonly disap- 
pointed, and the seasonable interposition of some miraculous power preserved 
the chaste spouses of Christ from the dishonor even of an involuntary defeat." 
— Gibbon, 



170 APPENDIX. 

" How shall we know that the alleged revelation is of divine authority ? By 

the miracles and prophecies which accompanied it. And how shall we know that 
the alleged miracles and prophecies were true? From the testimony of the 
Scriptures. And how do we know that the testimony of the Scriptures is 
reliable? Because they were inspired by God. And how do we know they 
were inspired by God ? By the testimony of the Holy Ghost, which when we 
read the Scriptures recognises his own work. But how do we know that this 
internal evidence is the testimony of the Holy Ghost and not of some evil spirit? 
Here the string breaks." — Strauss — Christliche Crlauoenslshre. 

"A prophetical pamphlet, published in 1651, by the famous astrologer Lilly, 
was thought to be so signally verified by the great fire of London, that the 
author was summoned before the House of Commons, and publicly requested 
there to favor them with his advice respecting the prospects of the nation."— 

Edinburgh Bevieiv, July, 1S44. 

Opinions of Great Tree-Thinkers on the Character of Jesus. 

Section XXXII. Note 6. 

" Whatever be the spirit with which the four Gospels be approached, it is im- 
possible to rise from the attentive perusal of them without a strong reverence 
for Jesus Christ. Even the disposition to cavil and ridicule is forced to retire 
before the majestic simplicity of the Prophet of Nazareth. Unlike Moses or 
Mahomet he owes no part of the lustre which surrounds him to his acquisition of 
temporal power; his is the ascendancy which mankind, in proportion to their 
mental advancement, are least disposed to resist — that of moral and intellectual 
greatness. The virtue, wisdom and sufferings of Jesus, will secure to him a 
powerful influence over men so long as they continue to be moral, intellectual 
and sympathising beings. And as the tendancy of human improvements is to- 
wards the progressive increase of these qualities, it may be presumed that the 
empire of Christianity, considered simply as the influence of the life, character 
and doctrine of Christ over the human mind, will never cease." — Hennell — 
Origin of Christianity. 

Goethe says The Spirit of God is nowhere more beautifully revealed than in 
the New Testament. 

The celebrated Hindoo Free-Thinker and reformer, Rammohun Roy, wrote : 
"After long and uninterrupted researches into religious truth, I have found 
the doctrines of Christ more conducive to moral principles and better adapted 
for the use of rational beings, than any others which have come to my know- 
ledge," 

Carlyle styles Jesus a divine man. 

"Abstracting what is really his, from the rubbish in which it is buried, easily 
distinguished by its lustre from the dross of his biographers, and as separable 
from that as the diamond from the dunghill, we have the outlines of a system 
of the most sublime morality, which has ever fallen from the hps of man." — 
Thomas Jefferson—Letter to" Mr. Short, Oct. 31, 1819. 

"I think Christ's system of morals and his religion as he left them to us, the 
best the world ever saw or is likely to see ; but 1 apprehend that they have re- 
ceived various corrupting changes." — Benjamin Franklin. — Sparks' 1 biography \ 
p. 515, 



APPENDIX. 171 

" The Christian religion raises the dim perception of divine existence, which 
is apparently born with, and natural to all men, to the simplest and most en- 
lightened ideas of the Deity — to ideas the most worthy of the Godhood and 
the most elevating to mankind; purifies the mind from all superstitions of the 
agency of demons and wizards, and creates in every human soul, wherein it 
prevails, an overflowing fountain of unbounded confidence in God, of love for 
all good, of all-embracing humanity, of exhaustless fortitude in adversity, of 
temperance and humility in prosperity, of patience in suffering, of peace of 
heart, of content with the present, and of never-dying hope for a better future. 
The faith of Jesus was a pure theosophy in the simplest sense of the word." — 
Wieland — Ueber den freien Gebraucli der Vemunft in Glaubenssaclien. Section 
XXVII. 

From Rousseau 's Confession of a Savoyard Vicar. 

" I confess to you that the holiness of the gospel is an argument which speaks 
to my heart, and to which I should regret to find a refutation. Look at the 
books of the philosophers, with all their pomp, how small are they in compari- 
son. Can it be that a book, at once so simple and so sublime, can be the work 
of man ? Can it be that he, whose history is there written, was but a man ? 
Are these the words of a fanatic or of an ambitious partizan ? What sweetness, 
what purity of manners! What touching grace in his discourses! What no- 
bleness in his maxims! W r hat profound wisdom in his words ! What presence 
of mind, perspicacity and justice in his replies ! What command over his pas- 
sions! Where is the man, the sage who can live, suffer and die without weak- 
ness and without ostentation? W r hen Plato described his imaginary just man, 
covered w T ith all the disgrace of crime, and worthy of all the rewards of virtue, 
he painted Jesus Christ, feature for feature; the likeness is so striking that all 
the fathers of the Church perceived it, and it was impossible to mistake it. 
How prejudiced, how blind must not he be, who would dare to compare the son 
of Sophroniscus to the Son of Mary. How r little resemblance between them ! 
Socrates, dying without pain, without ignominy, easily supported his character 
to the last; and if this easy death had not honored his life, we should doubt 
whether Socrates, with all his genius, was more than a sophist. He invented, 
it is said, moral law; but others before him had practiced morality; he said no 
more than others had done; he only reduced to precepts previous examples. 
Arist'des had been just before Socrates defined justice; Leonidas died 
for his country before Socrates taught the duty of love of country ; Spartans 
were self-denying before Socrates inculcated sobriety; before he defined 
virtue, Greece had abounded in virtuous men. But whence from among the 
Jews did Jesus derive that elevated pure morality, of which he alone gave 
the example and the precept V In the midst of the most furious fanati- 
cism, was heard the sublimest wisdom, and the simplicity of the most he- 
roic virtues honored the vilest of all people. The death of Socrates, philo- 
phising among his friends, was the mildest possible ; that of Jesus, by a horrible 
torture, abused, derided, cursed by the whole people, was the most tearful that 
could be imagined. Socrates taking the prisoner's cup from the weeping officer, 
pardons him ; in the midst of his Frightful sufferings Christ blesses his execu- 
tioner. Yes, the life and death of Socrates were those of a sage; but the life 
and death of Jesus were those of a God." 

Paine styles Jesus a virtuous reformer. 

Voltaire says, "He must have been a sage since he declaimed against 



112 



APPENDIX. 



priestly impostors and superstitions ; but the sayings and doings imputed to 
nim, were not always those of a wise man." 

Mendelsohn said the Jews in his days considered Jesus as a generous en- 
thusiast. 

" Religion and morality, as they now stand, compose a practical code of mis- 
ery and servitude; the genius of human happiness must tear every leaf from 
the accursed book of God, ere man can read the inscription on his heart." — 

Shelley. 

Antiquity of the Egyptian Empire. 
Section XXXV. Note 8. 

" The Egyptian empire first presents itself to view about 4000 years before 
Christ, as that of a mighty nation, in full tide of civilization, aid surrounded 
by other realms and races already emerging from the barbarous stage. — Types 
of Mankind ', page 57. 

" The Egyptian monuments and records carry us to the beginning of the third 
milienium, [2000 years,] before the birth of Christ ; and the earliest glimpse we 
gain of the condition of mankind in this country, exhibits them as already far 
advanced in civilization, and bearing no marks of so recent an origin from the 
single family as even the Septuaguint Chronology supposes." * * * * * 

"The consequence of the method which has been commonly adopted of 
making the Jewish Chronology the bed of Procrustes, to which every other 
must conform its length, has been, that credence has been refused to histories, 
such as that of Egypt resting upon unquestionable documents; and we have 
voluntarily deprived ourselves of at least a thousand years, which have been 
edeemed for us from the darkness of ante-historic times." — Rev. John Kenrick. 

Kenrick says : — " The negro with all his peculiarities of form, color, and 
hair, appears'just the same in the paintings of the age of Thothnies III, fifteen 
centuries before the Christian era, as he is now seen in the interior of Africa." 

" Without going beyond the history itself, it must appear incredible that a 
little more than four hundred years after the world was dispeopled by the flood 
Abraham should have found a Pharaoh reigning over the monarchy of Egypt, 
and that the East as far as its condition is disclosed to us, should present' no, 
trace of recent desolation, but is already occupied and divided into commu- 
nities." — Kendrick. 

Dr. Usher, one of the authors of the " Types of Mankind," asserts that the 
plain on which the city of New Orleans is situated, is at least one hundred and 
fifty thousand years old. In digging down into the earth there has been found 
to be a considerable depth of alluvial deposits; and the remains often distinct 
C} r press forests have been discovered one above the other. Each of these forests 
must have required many hundreds of years to grow, and then to sink to 
become the foundation for another growth. In the remains of the fourth forest 
from the top, and seveu feet below the level of the Gulf of Mexico, were found 
a human skull and some burned wood, which, according to Usher's estimate, 
were deposited there 40,000 years ago. 

The North China Herald, published at Shanghae, of Oct. 29, 1853, contained 
an able article on Chinese Chronology, by Dr. Macgowan, a high authority. He 



APPENDIX. 173 

says in substance that the literature of China reaches back to the reign of Yaou, 
who lived 4000 years ago, or 2200 years before Jesus. The strongest evidences 
of the approximate correctness of their Chinese Chronology are drawn from the 
Chinese astronomy. The group or Star Maou, one of the 28 constellations 
known to us under the name of Pleiades, is said in the first chapter of the Shoo- 
King to have been a criterion for the time of the winter Solstice. This means 
that the Star would appear m the South at sunset at that time of the year. The 
Pleiades are now distant a little more than a sign iron: the summer Solstice, or 
nearly 150 degrees from, the winter Solstice. In order to account for the re- 
moval of 90 degrees from this latter point, an interval of 4000 years must be 
allowed, for the equinoctial points do not move more than a degree in 71 years. 

While the pole of the ecliptic remains unmoved, the north pole, by the slow 
displacement of the earth's position, revolves round it on a circle whose radius 
is 23}^ degrees. It happens that on tl^s circle, about 60 degrees in advance of 
the present pole star, are two stars named respectively T'een-yib, and T'ae-yih, 
the former being the more distant. These names mean the Heavenly One, and 
the Great One; and the names, being very ancient, suggests the idea that these 
stars were the successive pole stars of early observers. 

The Chinese calendar Hia-Sia-ouching,''said by the Chinese writers to be a, 
relic of the time of Yu, (B. C. 2200.) says, that among the stars of the Fourth 
Month, (one day of which corresponded to our 21st May,) "Maou, (Pleiades,) is 
seen at the beginning of evening twilight ; Nau-mun, (Southern door,) is on the 
meridian/' This last star is at the foot of the Centaur and is a very bright one, 
as those who have seen it in the southern latitudes are aware. It had through 
the precession of the equinoxes long retreated beneath the horizon of Chinese 
astronomers, and was restored to their maps by the Jesuits, 

Existence and ITature of God. 
Section XLII. Note 7, 

The System of Nature says : 

"In rfsing from cause to cause men have e; ded by seeing nothing ; and in this 
obscurity they placed their God : in this dark abyss their restless imaginations 
toil to manufacture chimeras which will oppress them, until an acquaintance 
with nature shall have stripped the phantoms which they have in all ages so 
vainly adored. 

"If we wish to render an account to ourselves of the nature of our belief in the 
Deity, we must confess that, by the word God, men have never bee > able to 
designate more than the most hidden cause, the most unknown and distant of 
effects. The word is not used until natural and known causes cease to be 
visible; not until they lose the thread of causes, or being unable to follow it 
and cut through the difficulty by styling God the first cause: that is, he is the 
last cause of which they knew anything. Thus they only give a le to 

an unknown force, before which their ignorance or idleness force them to si 
Whenever any one says that God is the author of such phenomenon, it is as 
much as to say that he does not know how that phenomenon could be pro- 
duced by natural causes known to us." 

Atkinson, in " Man's Nature and Development," says that the application of 
the word Design to "nature's dv)ings ? and the fitness and form of things," is 
absurd. " Man designs, Nature is." 

Pantlie is?n. 
iter defines Pantheism to be tb$ belief that the universe is God, Pan- 



174 APPENDIX. 

theism — at least as generally understood now by men acknowledging themselves 
pantheists — is a belief that the only cause— be it styled Deity, Divinity, God, or 
any other name — of the present order of things, is a principle of order inherent 
in matter, inseparable from it, and all-pervading; aud this principle is uncon- 
scious, and has existed with matter from all eternity. A belief similar to this 
is now adopted by a large portion if not by a majority of the great philosophers 
and the scientific men of the age. The most of the so-called atheists areor were 
pantheists. The majority of the Greek philosophers were Pantheists. 

Goethe has a few famous lines beginning — 

" Was waer ein G-ott der nur von aussen stiesse,- <£c. 
For this passage I can find no translation to suit me, and must reduce it to 
prose as follows: "Alas for the creed whose God lives outside of the universe 
and lets it spin round his finger. OTe universal spirit dwells within and not 
without. He includes Nature and Nature includes Him." 

Faust, in talking to Margaret, speaks as though the name of the universal 
spirit were a matter of no consequence — Good, Heart, Love, God, either being 
sufficient. 

A French author says: "To say what God is, it would be necessary to be 
himself." 

"You are fit [says the supreme Krishna of Braminism to a sage] to appre- 
hend that you "are not distinct from me: that which I am, thou art, and that 
also is the world with its gods, and heroes, and mankind. Men contemplate 
distinctions because they are stupefied with ignorance." — Emerson on Plato. 

Strauss says, the idea of God is his existence. Hegel says, God arrives at 
consciousness only in man. 

Emerson is a Pantheist ; and Carlyle appears to be, though the shade of the 
latter's belief is not seizable from his works. In the life of Sterling he relates a 
conversation between Sterling and another person (probably Carlyle). Sterling 
declared The faith of the other to be "flat Pantheism ! It is mere Pantheism, 
that !" " And suppose it were Pot-theism," cried the othe^, " if it is true ?" 

Bacon appears to have been a Pantheist. He says in his De Oupidme (on the 
Source of Existence), " Almost all the ancients — Empedoc es, Anaxagoras, 
Anaximenes, Heraclitus, Democritus — though disagreeing in other respects 
upon the prime matter, joined in this — that they held an active matter with a 
form, both arranging its own form, and hav ng within itself a principle of 
motion. Nor can any one think otherwise without leaving experience alto- 
gether. All these, then, submitted their minds to Nature." Again, he says 
of this same Pantheism of Deuiocritus: "But while the dicta of Aristotle and 
Plato are celebrated with applauses and professional ostentation in the schools, 
the philosophy of Democritus was in great repute among the wiser sort and 
those who more closely gave themselves to the depth and silence of contempla- 
tion." Ag;»in he says, " The prime matter is to be laid down, joined with the 
primitive form as also with the first principle of motion as it is found. For the 
abstraction of motion has also given rise to innumerable devices, concerning 
spirits — life and the like — as if there were not iaid a sufficient ground for them 
through matter and form, but they depended on their own elements. But 
heee three (matter, form and life) are not to be separated, but only distinguish* 



APPENDIX. 175 

ed; and matter is to be treated (whatever it be) in regard to its adornment, 
appendages and form, as that all kind of influence, essence, action, and natural 
motion may appear to be its emanation and consequence." 

Bacon was long supposed to be no enemy of Christianity, because he did not 
violently oppose it. But he was not disposed to be a martyr to Christian 
fanaticism. He laments that he cannot "dismiss all art and circumstance, and 
exhibit the matter naked to us, that we might be enabled to use our judgment. 
Thinkest thou," he says, "that when all the accesses and motions of all minds 
are besieged and obstructed by the obscurest idols, deeply rooted and branded 
in, the sincere and polished areas present themselves in the true and native 
rays of things ; but as the delirium of phrenetics (frenzy) is subdued by art and 
ingenuity, not by force and contention, raised to fury; so in this universal 
insanity, we must use moderation " — Quoted oy Atkinson: 

About forty years ago De Maistre, a French author, published a large book to 
prove Bacon an Atheist, De Maistre could not distinguish between Atheism 
and Pantheism. 

On this subject, see "Man's Nature and Development," by Henry Atkinson 
and Harriet Martineau. 

Shelley was a Pantheist. 

Fichte says, "You give personality and consciousness to your God. What 
do you mean by 'personality' and ' consciousness ?' The slightest attention to 
the meaning which you attach to these words, would convince you that they 
presuppose limitation and finite condition in their possessor. In representing 
God as conscious and personal, you make him finite, and reduce him to your 
own level: when you think Him, you do not think a God but a man. We 
feel and know ourselves to be persons only by our separation from other simihir 
persons outside of us, from whom we are separated; and consequently we are 
finite. In and for this domain of finitude only, an idea of personality exists; 
beyond it the word loses its meaning. To speak of a personal divinity, or a 
divine personality appears from this point of view as a connection of ideas which 
exclude and annihilate each other. Personality is a self-hood fenced in against 
outsiders; absoluteness, on the contrary, is the comprehensive, unlimited, infi- 
nite which excludes all personality." 

" That none of the ancient philosophers conceived God, for instance, as a 
being distinct from the world, or a pure metaphysical monad, but all adhered 
to the idea of a soul of the world was perfectly consonant to the childhood of 
human philosophy, and perhaps will forever remain consonant to it." — Herder. 
Philosophy of History. 

The Moral Government of the Universe. 

The attempts to account for the moral government of the world, the sufferings 
of the good and the prosperity of the wicked have been very numerous, but 
the solution of the problem is beyond the reach of the human mind. The stoics 
and the optimists say there is no evil; all is good. 

Hume says : " Are there any marks of a distributive justice in the world ? If 
you answer in the affirmative I conclude that, since justice here exerts itself, it 
is satisfied. If you reply in the negative, I conclude that you have then no 
reason to ascribe justice in our sense of it to the Gods. If you hold a medium 
between affirmation and negation, by saying that the justice of the Gods at 
present exerts itself in part, but not in its full extent, I answer that you have no 



A3 PEXJHX, 

I any particular extent,, but only so far as you see it at preg 
exert itself." 

Leibnitz remarks: M Tha aer kind of justice which has for object,. 

others, nor the reparation 
of evil d^ne by the offend ■-.■' 

astrianism as "a bold and T of 

- 
ernor of the Universe with the prevalence of physical and moral evil.' 7 

An ancient author thought. there would fc the 

sufferings of the 

righteous to be trials and those of the wicked to be pun Voltaire, 

speaking of the drowning of a boat load of people, among- wh rreat 

criminal, said, '"God has punished that rogue, the devil has arc I est.' 7 

Diderot in recording the d fate of two rascals, said, " Providence has 

chastised one, but has granted s lents of respite to the other." Bayle, 

. vations upon the Mosaic myth of Adam in Paradise, 
and the fall, compares Jehovah to "A mother, who knowing certainly that her 
daughter would lose her virginity at a certain place and time, if solicited by a 
certain person, should manage the interview and leave hei I there un- 

led." 

" The man who first pronounced the barbarous word Dieu. [GodJ ought to 
have been inline 

B >bespierre declared that if there was no G ;d, it would be necessary to ir.venc 
one. He lectured so much about hi- : one of his companions at last 

exclaimed, nbeter — You are be- 

ginning to bore me with your Supreme Being.) 

"Either God would prevent evil and cannot, or he can and would not, or he 
cannot and would not^ or he will and can If he would prevent evil and cannot, 
he is not omnipotent ; if he can and would not, he is not all good ; if he cannot 
and would not desire to do so, he is limited in both power and goodness ; and 
if he has the power and the desire to prevent evil, why does he not do bo V — 

rHS. 

" If experience and observation and analogy be indeed the only guides which 
we can res follow in inferences of this nature, both the effect and 

causes must bear a similarity and resemblance to other effects and causes 
which we know and which we hive foun 1 in many mstan 

* * * * Ify ■-- ice, a half-finished building 

surrounded with heaps of brick, and stone, and mortar and all the instruments 
of masonry, could you not infer - - and 

nev." -ct, and conclude that the building n be 

shed and receive all the further improve t could bes upon 

it ? 

elude that a ma races of the 

oth. ijrh effaced by the rolling of the sands or the inui 1 the 

method of reasoning with r 
to the order of nature ? Consider the world and the present life only as an im- 
perfect building from which you cau infer a superior intelligence; and arguing 



APPENDIX, ITt 

from that superior intelligence, which can leave nothing imperfect, why may 
you not infer a more finished scheme or plan, which will receive its completion 
in some distant point of space or time? Are not these methods of reasoning 
exactly similar? And under what pretence can you embrace the one while 
you reject the other ? * * * * But what is the foundation of this method 
of reasoning? Plainly this, that man is a hsing whom we know by experience, 
whose motives and design we are acquainted with, and whose projects and in- 
clinations have a certain coherence according to the laws which nature has es- 
tablished for the government of such a creature," — David Hume. 

" To say that God is the author of all good, and man the author of all evil, is 
to say that one man made a straight line and a crooked one, and another man 
made the incongruity." — Shelley. 

The Mind is the Function of the Brain. 

Section XLIV. Note 8. 

All the statements which I now make are well established principles of the 
science of physiology, and I give below some extracts from 'Carpenter's Ele- 
ments of Physiology,' a work of the highest authority. The extracts which I 
present, prove that the cerebellum, or lower and back part of the brain, is the 
seat of the power of the harmonious movement of the muscular system ; that 
the cerebrum, or upper and fore part of the brain, is the seat of intelligence; 
and that the brain is worn away by the activity of its function, the mind. 

The extracts from Carpenter are as follows : 

Functions of the Cerebellum. 

Much discussion has taken place, of late years, respecting the uses of the 
Cerebellum ; and many experiments have been made to determine them. That 
it is in some way connected with the powers of motion, might be inferred from 
its connection with the anteriolateral columns of the Spinal Cord, as well as 
with the posterior; and the comparative size of the organ, in different orders of 
Vertebrated animals, gives us some indication of what the nature of its func- 
tions may be. For we find its degree of development corresponding pretty 
closely with the variety and energy of the muscular movements which are ha- 
bitually executed by the species ; the organ being the largest in those animals 
which require the combined effort of a great variety of muscles to maintain their 
usual position, or to execute their ordinary movements ; whilst it is the smallest 
in those which require no muscular exertion for the one purpose, and little 
combination of different actions for the other. Thus in animals that habitually 
rest and move upon four legs, there is comparatively little occasion for any or° 
gan to combine and organize the actions of their several muscles ; and in these 
the Cerebellum is usually small. But among the more active of the predaceous 
fishes, (as the shark,)— birds of the most powerful and varied flight, (as the 
swallow,) — and such Mammals as can maintain the erect position, and can 
use their extremities for other purposes than support and motion — we find 
the Cerebellum of much greater size, relatively to the remainder of the Euce- 
phnlon. There is a marked advance in this respect, as we ascend through the 
series of Quadrumanous animals ; from the baboons, which usually walk on all- 
fours, to the semi-erect apes, which often stand and move on their hind-legs 
only. The greatest development of the Cerebellum is found in Man, who sur- 
passes all other animals in the number and variety of the combinations of mus- 



US APPENDIX. 

cular movement, which his ordinary actions involve, as well as of those which 
he is capable, by practice, of learning to execute. 

From experiments upon all classes of Vertebrated animals, it has been found 
that, when the Cerebellum is removed, the power of walking, springing, flying;, 
standing, or maintaining the equilibrium of the body, is destroyed. It does 
not seem that the animal has in any degree lost the voluntary power over its 
individual muscles; but it cannot combine their actions for any general move- 
ment of the body. The reflex movements, such as those of respiration, remain 
unimpaired. When an animal thus mutilated, is laid on its back, it cannot re- 
cover its former posture; but it moves its limbs, or flutters its wiugs, and evi- 
dently not in a state of stupor. When placed in the erect position, it staggers 
and ftUs like a drunken man — not, however, without making efforts to maintain 
its balance. 

When the Cerebellum is affected with chronic disease, the motor function is 
seldom destroyed ; but the same kind of want ot combining power shows itself, as 
when the organ has been purposely mutilated. Some kind of lesion of the mo- 
tor function is invariably to be observed ; whilst the mental powers may or may 
not be affected — probably according to the influence of the disease in the Cere- 
bellum upon other parts' The same absence of any direct connection with the 
Psychical powers, is shown in the fact, that inflammation of the membranes 
covering it, if confined to the Cerebellum, does not produce delirium. Sudden 
effusions of blood into its substance may produce apoplexy or paralysis ; but 
this may occur as a consequence of effusions into any part of the Encephalon, 
and does not indicate, that the Cerebellum has anything to do with the mental 
functions, or with the power of the will over the muscles. 
Functions of the Gerebrum. 

The results of the removal of the Cerebral Hemispheres, in animals to which 
the shock of the operation does not prove immediately fatal, must appear extra- 
ordinary to those who have been accustomed to regard these organs as the 
centre of all energy. Not only Reptiles, but Birds and Mammalia, if their phy- 
sical wants be supplied, may survive the removal of the whole Cerebrum for 
weeks, or even months. If the entire mass be taken away at once, the opera- 
tion is usually fatal; but it it be removed by successive slices, the shock is less 
severe, and the depression it produces in the organic functions is soon recovered 
from. It is difficult to substantiate the existence of actual sensation, in animals 
thus circumstanced; but their movements appear to be of a higher kind than 
those resulting from mere reflex action. Thus they will eat fruit when it is put 
into their mouths: although they do not go to seek it. One of the most re- 
markable phenomena of such beings, is their power of maintaining their equili- 
brium ; which could scarcely exist without consciousness. If a rabbit, thus 
mutilated, be laid upon its back, it rises again ; if pushed, it walks ; if a bird be 
thrown into the air, it flies ; if a frog be touched it leaps. If violently aroused, 
the animal has all the manner of one waking from sleep; and it manifests about 
the same degree of consciousness as a sleeping man, whose torpor is not too 
profound to prevent his suffering from an uneasy position, and who moves him- 
self to amend it. In both cases, the movements are consensual only, and do not 
indicate any voluntary power ; and we may well believe that, in the former 
case as in the latter, though feU, hey are not remembered- ; an active state of 
the Cerebrum being essential to memory, though not to sensations, which sim- 
ply excite certain actions. 

The relative amount of intelligence in different animals bears so close a cor- 
respondence with the relative size and development ot the Cerebral Hemispheres, 



APPENDIX. 179 

that it can scarcely be questioned that these constitute the organ of the Reason- 
ing faculties, and issue the mandates bv which the Will calls the muscles into 
action. It must be brrne in mind, however, that size is not by any means the 
only indication of their comparative development. 

In the condition of dreaming, it would seem as if the Cerebrum were par- 
tially active; a train of thought being suggested, frequently by se. sations 
from without; which is carried on without any controlling or directing power 
on the part of the Mind, and which is not corrected, or is only modified in a 
limited degree, by the knowledge acquired by experience. This condition is 
stiil more remarkable in somnambulism, or (as' it has been better termed) sleep- 
waking; on which the dreams are not only acted, but maybe often acted on 
with the utmost facility — a suggestion conveyed through any of the senses ex- 
cepting sight, (which is usually in abeyance,) "being apprehended and followed 
up with the utmost readiness, and, in like manner, with little or no correction 
from experience. Between this condition, and that of ordinary dreaming, on 
the one hand, and that of complete insensibility on the other, there is every 
shade of variety ; which is presented by different individuals, or by the same 
individuals at different times. The Cerebellum, in the sleep-waking state, seems 
to be frequently in a condition of peculiar activity; remarkable power of balanc- 
ing and combining the movements of the body being often exhibited. 

The faculty of memory appears to be the exclusive attribute of the Cerebral 
Hemispheres; no impressions made upon the Organs of Sense being ever re- 
membered, unless they are at once registered, (as it were,) in this part of the 
nervous centres. This faculty is one of those first awakened in the opening 
mind of the infant; and it is one of which we find traces in animals, that seem 
to be otherwise governed by pure instinct. It obviously affords the first step to- 
wards the exercise of the reasoning powers ; since no experience can be obtained 
without it; and the foundation of all intelligent adaptation of means to ends, 
lies in the application of the knowledge which has been acquired and stored up 
in the mind. There is strong reason to believe that no impression of this kind, 
once made upon the Brain, is ever entirely lost — except through disease or acci- 
dent, which will frequently destroy the memory altogether, or will annihilate 
the recollection of some particular class of objects or words. 
Wear of Brain. 

Like all other tissues actively concerned in A he vital operations, Nervous mat- 
ter is subject to waste or disintegration, which bears an exact proportion to the 
activity of its operations ; — or, in other words, that every act of the Nervous 
system involves the death and decay cf a certain amount of Nervous matter, 
the replacement of which will be requisite in order to maintain the system in a 
state tit for action. We shah hereafter see, that there are certain parts of the 
Nervous system, particularly those which put in action the respiratory 
muscles which are in a state of unceasing, though moderate, activity; 
and in these, the constant nutrition is sufficient to repair the effects of the 
constant decay. But those parts, which operate in a more powerful and 
energetic manner, and which therefore waste more rapidly when in ac- 
tion, need a season of rest for their reparation. Thus a sense of fatigue is 
experienced, when the mind has been long acting through its instrument — the 
brain; indicating the necessity of rest and reparation. And when sleep, or ces- 
sation of the cerebral functions, comes on, the process of nutrition talves place 
with unchecked energy, counterbalances the results of the previous waste, and 
prepares the organ for a renewal of its activity. In the healthy state of the 
oody, when the exertion of the nervous system by day docs not exceed that, 



180 



APPENDIX. 



which the repose of the night may compensate, it is maintained in a condition 
which fits it for constant moderate exercise; but unusual demands upon its 
powers — whether by the long continued and severe exercise of the intellect, by 
excitement of \he emotions, or by combination of both in that state of ana. 
which the circumstances of man's condition so frequently induce — produce an 
unusual waste, which requires, for a complete restoration of its powers, a pro- 
longed repose. 

There can be no doubt that (from causes which are not known,') the amount 
of sleep required by different persons, for the maintenance of a healthy condi- 
tion of the nervous system, varies considerably ; some being able to dispense 
with it, to a degree which would be exceedingly injurious to others of no greater 
mental activity. Where a prolonged exertion of the mind has been made, and 
the natural tendency to sleep has been habitually resisted by a strong effort of 
the will, injurious results are sure to follow. The bodily health breaks down, 
and too frequently the mind itself is permanently enfeebled. It is obvious that 
the nutrition of the nervous system becomes completely deranged ; and that 
the tissue is no longer formed, in the manner requisite for the discharge of its 
healthy functions. 

As the amount of muscular tissue that has undergone disintegration is repre- 
sented, (other things being equal,) by the quantity of urea in the urine, so do 
we find that an unusual waste of the nervous matter is indicated by an increase 
in the amount of pJiosphatic deposits. No others (if the soft tissues contain auy 
large proportion of phosphorus ; and the marked increase in these deposits, 
which has been continually observed to accompany long-continued wear of 
mind, whether by intellectual exerti ;n or by anxiety, can scarcely be set down 
to any other cause. The most satisfactory proof is to be found in cases in which 
there is a periodical demand upon the mental powers; as, for example, among 
clergymen, in the preparation for, aud discharge of, their Sunday duties. This 
is found to be almost invariably followed by the appearance of a large quantity 
of the phosphates in the urine. And in cases in which constant and severe in- 
tellectual exertion has impaired the nutrition of the brain, and has constantly 
weakened the mental power, it is found that any premature attempt to renew 
the activity of its exercise, causes the reappearance of the excessive phosphatic 
discharge, which indicates an undue waste of nervous matter. 

Thus far Carpenter. 

From Yogfs Physiology. 

"But it was always principally theology that wished to speak a word to hem 
the progress of the natural sciences, which planted these [orthodox, anti-scien- 
tific] representations in the theory of human development, and sought to keep 
them there. The soul was indeed given to the priest as his domain ; he was 
to care for it, not only while it was in the body, but also after it should have 
left its earthly dwelling ; and to prevent their subject from escaping, the priests 
asserted, in the face of all evidence, the existence of an immaterial mind which 
would live after death independently of the body. 

"It is not necessary to go into a lengthy essay to show the manner in which 
sound philosophy views this question. There are only two points of observa- 
tion. Either the function of every organ of an animated body is an immaterial 
being which only makes use of the organ ; or the function is a property of the 
matter. In the latter case the intellectual faculties are only functions of the 
brain, develop themselves with it, and exphe with it. The soul, therefore, does 
not take possession of the fcetus, as the evil spirit was represented to enter 



APPENDIX. 181 

lunatics, but is a product of the development of the brain, as the muscular 
power is a product of the development of the muscles." — Yogi's Physiologische 
Brief o fuer GebUdete alter Staende. 

The same author says elsewhere : 

" Physiology breaks the support of the views of theologians in regard to the 
soul, by declaring that there are no active powers in man except the material 
organs and their functions, and that the latter must die with the former. We 
have seen that we can destroy the intellectual faculties by injuring the brain. 
By the observation of the development of the embryo, we can easily convince 
ourselves that the mental powers grow as the brain is gradually developed. 
The foetus makes uo manifestations of thought or consciousness, but its move- 
ments evince the capability of reflex action and the susceptibility to nervous 
influence. Only after birth does the child begin to think, and only after birth 
does its brain acquire the material development of which it is capable. With 
the course of life, the mind changes, and it ceases to exist with the death of 
the organ. 

"Physiology declares itself positively and clearly against any individual 
immortality, aud against all those representations which connect themselves 
with the special existence of a soul. She is not only entitled to speak a word 
ou this subject, but it is her duty, and physiologists are justly liable to reproach 
for not having sooner raised their voices to point out the only true method of 
solving the problem of the soul." 

Free Agency. 

Section XLV. Note 9. 

Charles Lamb, in his " Confessions of a Drunkard," says: 
" I have known oue in that state, when he has tried to abstain but for one 
evening — though the poisonous potion had long ceased to bring back its first 
enchantments — though he was sure it would rather deepen his gloom than 
brighten it — in the violence of the struggle and in the necessity he has felt of 
getting rid of the present sensation at any rate, I have known him to scream 
out, to cry aloud, for the anguish and pain of the strife within him. Why 
should I hesitate to declare that the man of whom I speak is myself?" 

" Free will in man is nothing more than a vicisitude of the supremacy of the 
faculties." — Vestiges of Creation. 

Immediate Divine Government. 

Section XL VI. Note 10. 

Bacon says, in his Advancement of Learning, " It is certain that God worketh 
nothing in nature except by second causes." 

Tlie Rev. Sydney Smith on Special Provider' 
"It is obvious that the Methodists entertain very erroneous and dangerous 
notions of the present judgments of God. A belief that Providence interferes 
in all the little actions of our lives, refers all merit and demerit to bad and good 
fortune, and c uses the successful man to be always considered as a good man, 
and the unhappy man as an object of d'r ine vengeance. It famishes ignorant 
and designing men with a power which is sure to be abused, — the cry of a 
judgment, ^judgment, is always easy to make, but not easy to resist. It encou- 
rages the grossest superstitions ; i'ov if the Deity rewards and punishes on 



182 APPENDIX. 

every slight occasion, it is quite impossible but that such a helpless being as 
man will set himself at work to discover the will of heaven in the appearances 
of outward nature, to apply all the phenomena of thunder, lightning, wind, and 
every striking appearance, *s the regulation of his conduct ; as the poor Metho- 
dist, when he rode into Piccadilly in a thunder storm, imagined that all the 
uproar of the elements was a mere hint to him not to preach at Mr. Romaine's 
chanel. Hence a great deal oi error and a great deal of secret misery. This 
doctrine of a theocracy, must necessarily place an excessive power in the hands 
of the clergy ; it applies so instantly and so tremendously to men's hopes and 
fears, that it must make the priest omnipotent over his people, as it always has 
done where it has been established. It has a great tendency to check human 
exertions, and to prevent the employment of those secondary means of effecting 
an object which Providence has placed in our power. The doctrine of the 
immediate and perpetual interference of divine providence is not true. If two 
men travel on the same road, the one to rob, the other to relieve a fellow-crea- 
ture who is starving, will any but the most fanatic contend that they do not 
both run the same chance of falling over a stone and breaking their legs ? and is 
it not often matter of fact that the robber returns safe and the just man sustains 
the injury?" — Article on Methodism. 

" The Homeric Greek looked for wonders and unusual combinations in the 
past ; he expected to hear of gods, heroes, and men, moving and operating 
together upon earth ; he pictured to himself the foretime as a theatre in which 
the gods interfered directly, obviously, and frequently, for the protection of 
their favorites and the punishment of their foes. The rational conception, then 
only dawning in his mind, of a systematic course of nature, was absorbed by 
this fervent and lively faith. And if he could have been supplied with as perfect 
and philosophical a history of his own real past time, as we are now enabled to 
furnish with regard to the last centiuy of England or France, faithfully record- 
ing all the successive events, and accounting for them by known positive laws, 
but introducing no special interventions of Zeus or Apollo — such a history 
would have appeared to him not merely unhol}- and unimpressive, but destitute 
of all plausibility or title to credence." — Grote — History of Greece. 

Sleeman on Hindoo Credulity. 
" The popular Hindoo poem of Ramaen describes the abduction of the heroine 
by the monster king of Ceylon, Rawan, and her recovery by means of the mon- 
key general Hunnooman. Every word of this poem, the people assured us, 
was written, if not by the hand of the deity himself, at least by his inspiration. 
Ninety-nine out of a hundred among the Hindoos implicitly believe not only 
every' word of the poem, but every word of every poem that has ever been 
written in Sanscrit, [the sacred language of Eisdostan]. If you ask a man 
whether he really believes any very egregious absurdity, quoted from these 
books, he replies, with the greatest naivete ["simplicity] in the world, 'Is it not 
written in the book ? and how shall it be there written, if not true?' The Hin- 
doo religion reposes on an entire prostration of mind — that continual and 
habitual surrender of the reasoning faculties which we are accustomed to make 
occasionally while we are at the theatre or in the perusal of works of fiction. 
* * * With the Hindoos the greater the improbability, the more monstrous 
and preposterous the fiction — the greater is the charm it has over their minds; 
and the greater their learning in the Sanscrit — the more they aie under the 
influence of this charm. Believing all to be written by the deity or under his 
inspiration, and the men and things of former days to have been different from 



APPENDIX. 183 

the men and things of the present day, and the heroes of these fables to have 

been demi-gods or people endowed with powers far superior to those of the 
ordinary men of their own day, the analogies of nature nre never for a moment 
considered ; nor do questions of probability or possibility according to those 
analogies e^er obtrude to dispel the charm with which they are so pleasingly 
bound. They go on through life, reading and talking of their monstrous 
fictions, which shock the taste and understanding" of other nations, without ever 
questioning the truth of one single incident or having it questioned." 

" History for this people [the Hindoos] is all a fairy tale." — Gambles and 
Recollections of an Indian Official, by Col. Sleeman. 

Pausanias, a heathen, who wrote in the first half of the second century ? 
said : 

" The men of those ancient days, on account of their righteousness and 

Eiety, were on terms of hospitality with the gods aud their companions at the 
oard, and when they acted uprightly they openly received honor from the 
gods, just as they were also visited with anger if they committed any iniquity. 
And then also they who are still honored in this manner, become gods instead 
of men. Thus also we can believe that a Lycaon was transformed into a beast, 
aud Niobe, the daughter of Tantalus, into a stone. But in my time when vice 
has reached its loftiest summit, and has spread itself abroad over the whole 
country and in all cities, no one has passed from man to god, except only in 
name and out of flattery to power, and the anger of the gods arises at evil more 
tardily, a.:d is not executed on men till after they have left this world. And 
much which used in former times to take place, and which happens ev<. n now, 
those persons who have mixed falsehood with truth, have rendered incredible 
to the multitude^ 

Dionysius Haiicarnassus says : — "The atheistic philosophers, if those persons 
deserve the name of philosophers, who scoff at all the appearances of the gods, 
which have taken place among the Greeks and the barbarians, would deduce 
all these histories from the trickery of man, and turn them into ridicule, as if 
none of the gods ever cared for any man ; but he who does not deny the gods a 
providential care over men, but believes that the gods are benevolent to the 
good, and angry against evil men, will not judge these appearances to be in- 
credible." 

"This injury, they [the Amazons] avenged by invading Attica — an under- 
taking neither ' trifling nor feminine.' The} 7- penetrated even into Athens itself, 
where the final battle, hard fought and at one time doubtful, by which Theseus 
crushed them, was fought in the very heart of the city. Attic antiquaries con- 
fidently pointed out the exact position of the two contending armies; the left 
wing of the Amazon? rested upon the spot occupied by the commemorative 
monument of the Amazoneion ; the right wing touched the Pnyx, the place in 
which the public assemblages ol the Athenian democracy were held. The 
details and fluctuations of the combat, as well as the final triumph and conse- 
quent truce, were recounted by these author-', with as complete faith and as 
much circumstantiality as those of the battle of Platea by Herodotus. No por- 
tion of the ante-historical epic appears to hare been more deeply worked into 
the national mind of Greece than this invasion and defeat of the Amazons. It 
was not only a constant theme of the logographers, but was also constantly 
appealed toby the popular orators along with Marathon and Salamis, among 
those antique exploits of which their fellow citizens might justly be proud, It 



184 APPENDIX, 

formed a part of the retrospective faith of Herodotus, Lysias, Plato, and Iso- 
krates, and the exact date of the event was settled by the Chronologists." — 
GroWs Greece. 

" These myths or current stories, [tales of the interference of the gods, Ac] 
the spontaneous and earliest growth of the Grecian mind, constituted at tne 
same time the entire intellectual stock of the age to which they belonged. They 
are the common root of all those different ramifications into which the mental 
activity of the Greeks subsequently diverged, containing as it were the preface 
and germ of the positive history and philosophy, the dogmatic theology and 
the professed romance * * * * They furnished aliment and solution to 
the vague doubts and aspirations of the age; they explained the origin of those 
customs and standing peculiarities with which men were familiar; they im~ 
pressed moral lessons, awakened patriotic sympathies, and exhibited in detail 
the shadowy but anxious presentiments of the vulgar, as to the agency of the 
gods; moreover they satisfied that craving for adventure and appetite for the 
ma vellous, which has in modern times become the province of fiction proper. 
It is difficult, we may say it is impossible, for a man of mature age to carry 
back his mind to his conceptions, such as they stood when he was a child, 
growing naturally out of his imagination and feelings, working upon a scanty 
stock of materials, and borrowing from authorities whom he blindly followed 
but imperfectly apprehended. A similar difficulty occurs when we attempt to 
place ourselves in the historical and quasi philosophical point of view which 
the ancient myths present to us. We can follow perfectly the imagination and 
feeling which dictated these tales, and we can admire and sympathise with them 
as animated, sublime, and affecting poetry ; but we are too^iuch accustomed 
to matter of fact and philosophy of a positive kind, to be arde to conceive a 
time when these beautiful fancies were construed literally, and accepted as 
serious reality." — GroWs Greece. 

" The great religious movement of the Reformation, and the gradual forma- 
tion of critical and philosophical habits in the modern mind, have caused these 
legends of the saints, once the charmed and cherished creed of a numerous 
public, to pass altogether out of credit, without even being regarded among 
the Protestants, at least, as worthy of a formal scrutiny into the evidence — a 
proof of the transitory value of public belief, however sincere and fervent, as a 
certificate of historical truth, if it be blended with religious predispositions." — 
Grote, 

The Condemnation and Redemption. 
Section XLYII. Note 11. 
Shelley's Para-phase of some Prominent Points of Ghristi-an Doctrine, 
" From an eternity of idleness 
I, God, awoke ; in seven days toil made earth 
From nothing; rested, and created man : 
I placed him in a paradise, and there 
Planted the tree of evil, so that he 
Might eat and perish, and my soul procure 
Wherewith to sate its malice, and to turn, 
Even like a heartless conqueror of the earth, 
All misery to my fame. The race of men 
Chosen to my honor, with impunity 
May sate the lusts I planted in their hearts," 



APPENDIX. 185 

"" I will beget a son, and he shall bear 
The sins of all the world : he shall arise 
In an unnoticed corner of the earth, 
And there shall die upon a cross, and purge 
The universal crime ; so that the few 
On whom my grace descends, those who are marked 
As vessels to the honor of their God, 
May credit this strange sacrifice, and save 
Their souls alive : millions shall live and die, 
Who ne'er shall call upon their Savi.-r's name* 
But, unredeemed, go to the gaping grave. 
Thousands shall deem it an old woman's tale* 
Such as the nurses frighten babes withal: 
There in a gulf of anguish and of flame 
Shall curse their reprobation endlessly, 
Yet tenfold pangs shall force them to avow, 
Even on their beds of torment where they howl* 
My honor and the justice of their doom." 
—Quem Mab. 

u Slaves, I desire your welfare S My goodness proposes to enrich you, and id 
render you all happy ^ Do you see these treasures? Well, they are for you> 
Every one of you must cast these dice. He who throws a six shali be master of 
the treasure ; but he who throws a smaller number shall be imprisoned forever 
in a narrow dungeon, and roasted on a slow fire, according to the demands of 
my justice." — Abbe Meslier, 

"Augustus having learned that Herod, King of Judea, had slain his own son^ 
exclaimed, ' It were better to be his hog than his son.' The philosopher may 
say as much of Jehovah and Adam. The favorite of the Creator is subject to 
far more risks and sorrow than the brutes. He lives in suffering on earth, and 
then is in danger of going to hell after death," — Abbe Meslier. 

" If you do not burn any paper in honor of Fo, and if you do not deposit any 
offerings on his altar, he will be displeased you think, and send his judgments 
on your head. What a miserable creature must your god Fo be then! Let us 
take the example of the magistrate of your district ; should you never go to 
compliment him, and pay y ur court to him, if you are honest people, attentive 
to your duty, he will not the less be well disposed toward you ; but if you 
transgress the law, commit violence, and encroach on the rights of others, ho 
will always be dissatisfied with you, though you should find a thousand ways 
of flattering him." — Chinese Philosopher, quoted in Hue's Journey Chap. K 

"A poor man in our day has many gods foisted on him, and big voices bid 
him-—' worship or be damned.' " — Oarlyle. 

11 Weakness of faith is partly constitutional and partly the result of education 
and other circumstances, and this may go intellectually almost as far as skep- 
ticism : that is to say a man may be perfectly unable to acquire a firm and un« 
doubting belief of the great truths of religion, whether natural or revealed. He 
may be perplexed with doubts all his days : nay his fears lest the gospel should 
not be true may be stronger than his hopes that it will, and this is a state of 
great pain and of most severe trial—to be pitied heartily, but not to be con- 
demned." — Dr> Arnold. 



186 A??Eisrr>ii. 

The preceding paragraph may show how a great man may be enslared to 
the Church. 

" If believing too little or too much is so fatal to mankind, what will become 
cfusalli'" — John Adams. 

Sydney Smith makes the following quotation from the journal of a Methodist ; 
" 1794, Jan. 26, Lord's day. Found much pleasure in reading Edward's ser« 
mon on the Justice of God in the damnation of sinners." 

Gibbon says; "The condemnation of the wisest and most virtuous of the 
Pagans, on account of their ignorance or disbelief of the divine truth, seems to 
offend the reason and humanity of the present age. But the primitive Church 
whose faith was of a much firmer consistence, delivered over without hesitation, 
to eternal torture, the far greater part of the humau species. A charitable hope 
might perhaps be indulged in favor of Socrates or some other sages of anti= 
quity, who had consulted the light of reason before that of the gospel had 
risen. But it was unanimously affirmed, that those who since the birth or 
death of Christ had obstinately persisted in the worship of the demons, neither 
deserved nor could expect a pardon from the irritated justice of the deity. 
These rigid sentiments, which had been unknown to the ancient world, appear 
to have infused a spirit of bitterness into a system of lo^e and harmony. The 
ties of blood and friendship were frequently torn asunder by the difference of 
religious faith ; and the Christians who in this world found themselves op- 
pressed by the power of the Pagans, were sometimes induced by resentment 
and spiritual pride, to delight in the prospect of their future triumph. ' You 
are fond of spectacles' exclaimed the stern Tertullian, 'expect the greatest of 
all spectacles, the last and eternal judgment of the universe. How shall I 
admire, how laugh, how rejoice, how exult, when I behold so many proud 
m-narchs, so many fancied gods groaning in the lowest abyss of darkness : so 
many magistrates who persecuted the name of the Lord, liquefying in fiercer 
fires than they ever kindled against the Christians; so many sage philosophers 
blushing in red hot flames with their deluded scholars ; so many celebrated 
poets trembling before the tribunal, not of Minos, but of Christ; so many 
tragedians, more tuneful in the expression of their own sufferings : so many 
dancers.' " 

Tertullian was " the doctor and guide" of all the Church of western Europe 
in his day. 

" Hell is paved with good intentions." 

Burns, in "Holy Willie's Prayer" apostrophises the deity of the New Testa- 
ment thus : — 

" thou, wha iu the heavens dost dwell* 
Wha, as it pleases best thyseP, 
Sends ane to heaven and ten to hell,, 

A' for thy glory, 
And no for ony gude or ill 

They've done afore thee." 

" Whence could arise the solitary and strange conceit that the Almighty, who 
has millions of worlds equally dependent on his protection, should quit the care 
of all the rest, and come to die in our world, because they say one man and one 
woman bad eaten an apple. And on the other baud are we to suppose that 



APPENDIX. 187 

every world in the boundless creation had an Ere, an apple, a serpent and a 
redeemer? In this case, the person who is irreverently called the son of God, 
and sometimes God himself, would have nothing else to do, than to travel from 
world to world in an endless succession of death with scarcely a momentary 
interval of life." — Thomas Paine — Age of Reason. 

Gibbon says; " One of the most subtle disputants of the Manichean school, 
has pressed the danger and indecency of supposing that the God of the Chris- 
tian, in the state of a human foetus, emerged at the end of nine months from a 
female womb. The pious horror of his antagonists provoked them to disclaim 
ail sensual circumstances of conception and delivery; to maintain that the 
divinity passed through Mary like a sunbeam through a plate of glass ; and to 
assert that the seal of her virginity remained unbroken even at the moment 
when she became the mother of Christ." 

Christianity not Taught by Christ. 

Section LX. Note 12. 

Morell says, that the apostles did not understand the teachings of Christ 
until long after his death. It was not " immediately after the resurrection 
of the savior, that Christianity as a moral phenomena in human life, was com- 
pleted. So far from that, much darkness, much doubt, and many dim percep- 
tions of christian truth were long observable in the minds of the apostles 
themselves, as well as their followers. Often did they meet together ; often 
did they deliberate over great and essentia! points ; often did they correct each 
other, as one saw his brother lingering too much amongst Jewish prejudices; 
often did they pray for divine light and guidance: and it was not until years 
of fellowship had been enjoyed— until the common consciousness had become 
awakened — until the spirit of truth had moulded their hearts and minds into 
some appreciable unity of thought and feeling, that Christianity as an entire 
religious system appeared." 

Idealistic Philosophy. 

Section LXV. Note 13. 

The idealistic philosophy is very old. It was prevalent in India in the time 
of Alexander : it was common in Greece, and is very common in our own age. 
The great effort of German transcendentalism was to prove that man could 
possess some positive knowledge ; that his own existence is an absolute truth. 
Kant styles man's consciousness of his existence a teaching of pure reason, 
of a faculty higher in authority than the judgment by which we draw ordinary 
conclusions from given premises. 

Bacon said : — " All that which is past is a dream ; and he that hopes or de- 
pends on time coming, dreams waking." 

Socrates said : — "All that we know is that we know nothing." 

" For anything I know, this world may be the Bedlam of the universe."— 
John Adams. 

The Eleatic Philosophers said : — " Thought and its object are one." 

Protagoras said :— " Man is the measure of all things." 



188 APPENDIX- 

" I imagine a man must have a good deal of vanity who believes, and a good 
deal of boldness, who affirms, that all the doctrines he holds are true, and all 
he rejects are false." — B, FranHin — Letter to Josiah Fra?i7din, 13th April, 1733. 

Eeligicn. 
Section LXYI. Note 14. 

Religion is man's idea of the nature of his existence, the existence, of the 
external universe and of its relations to him. In a common acceptation of 
the word, it means man's belief in regard to the existence of a deity, man's 
duties toward that deity, if any, and toward his fellow men and himself. 

Shelley defines religion to be " man's perception of his relation to the prin- 
ciple of the universe." 

Coleridge defines religion to be the union of the " subjective and the objec- 
tive." The subject is the Me, the object is the Not*me. God is part of the 
Kot-me, and according to Coleridge's definition, subjective and objective know- 
ledge must be placed upon the same level, before a man can possess religion. 

Palfrey defines Natural Religion to be " the Science of the being and attri- 
butes of God, of the relations which man sustains to him, and of the duty of 
mau as the; >vered or discoverable by the human understanding/ ex- 

erted without supernatuial aid." 

The growing skepticism of our time had its almost exact counterpart in 
Greece four hundred and fifty years before Christ. iEschylus, the great trage- 
dian, lamented greatly the advance of unbelief. He presaged every evil from 
it, and truly enough the mythology and glory of Greece went down together, 
and neither has ever risen. 

"Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained 
without religion." — Wa*hinotoiis Farewell Address, written oy Alexander 

Hamilton. &e JFiiniltons Works. 

u The Church as it now stands no power can save." — Arnold, 

Stray Notes. 

Description of a FasliioiidbU Priest. 

" A bi c hop among us is generally supposed to be a stately and pompous 
person, clothed in purple and fine linen, and faring sumptuously every day; 
somewhat obsequious to persons in power, and somewhat haughty and impera- 
tive to those who are beneath him : with more authority in his tone and man- 
ner, than solidity in his learning: and yet with much more learning than 
charity or humility ; very fond of being called my lord, and driving about 
in a coach with mitres in the panels, but" little addicted to visiting the sick and 
fatherless, or earning for himself the blessing of those wh. to perish, 

' Familiar with a round 

Of lady I anger to the poor' 

decorous in his manners, but no foe to luxurious indulgences : rigid in main- 
taining discipline among his immediate dependents, and in exacting the homage 
due to his dignity from the undignified mob of his brethren, but perfectly 
willing to leave to them the undivided privileges of comforting and of teaching 



APPENDIX. 189 

their people, and of soothing the sins and sorrows of their erring flocks; 
scornful, if not openly hostile, upon all occasions, to the claims of the people, 
from whom he is generally sprung-, and presuming everything in favor of the 
royal will and prerogative, by which he has been exalted j setting indeed, in all 
cases, a much higher value on the privileges of the few, than the rights that are 
commmto all, and exerting himself strenuously that the former may ever 
prevail ; caring more accordingly for the interests of his order, than the general 
good of the church, and far more £>r the church than the religion it was esta- 
blished to teach ; hating dissenters still more bitterly than infidels; but com- 
bating both rather with obloquy and invocation of civil penalties, than with the 
artillery of a powerful reason, or the reconciling influences of an humble and 
holy life ; uttering now and then haughty professions of humility, and regularly 
bewailing at fit seasons, the severity of those Episcopal labors, which sadden 
and even threaten to abridge life, which to all other eyes appear to flow on in 
almost unbroken leisure and continuous indulgences," — Edinburgh Review, 
Lee. 1828. 

"The French clergy does not live now [1823] as in times past, but shows a 
regularity of conduct worthy of the apostles. Happy effect of poverty! — 
Happy fruit of the persecution suffered in the grand epoch when God visited 
his church. It is not one of the least blessings of the revolution, that not only 
the cures, always respectable, but even the bishops are moral men." — Courier. 
— Quoted in the Edinburgh Review, March, 1829. 

" Instead of the four gospels adopted by the church, the heretics produced a 
multitude of histories in which the actions and discourses of Christ and of his 
apostles were adapted to their respective tenets." — Gibbon, Ch. XV. 

" It is customary [among the Chinese] to ask to 'what sublime religion' you 
belong 1 . One perhaps will call himself a Coufucionist, another a Buddhist, a third 
a disciple of Lao-tze, a fourth a follower of Mohammed, of whom there are 
many in China, and then every one begins to pronounce a panegyric on the 
religion to which he does not belong, as politeness requires; after which they 
all repeat in chorus, ' Pou4oun-Hao, toun-ly.' ' Religions are many ; 
reason is one ; we are all brothers.' This phrase is on the lips of every Chinese, 
and thev bandy it from one to the other with the most exquisite urbanity." — 
Hue's Journey through the OJiinese Empire. Chop. V. 

"For if enlightening the people with regard to those things in which they 
are most concerned, ought to be the object of a political establishment, Athens 
was unquestionably the most enlightened city throughout the whole world. 
Neither Paris nor London, neither Rome nor Babylon, aud still less Memphis, 
Jerusalem, Pekin or Benares can enter into competition with it." — Herder. 
— Philosophy of History. 

The more mysteries there are in a religion, and the more absurdities it con- 
tains, the more it attracts the imagination of ignorant people. The more 
obscure a creed is the more divine it appears, and the more likely to be the 
teaching of an unknown and incomprehensible being. It is the nature of igno- 
rance to prefer the unknown, the hidd n, the fabulous, the wonderful, the in- 
credible and even the terrible [in religion] to the clear and simple. ^ * * 
The inhabitants of a village are never more pleased with their curate than when 
he mixes an abundance of Latin in his sermons. They always imagine that he 
who speaks to them of things which they do not understand, is an able man." — 
Abbe Mesltir. 



190 



APPENDIX. 



Acknowledgments . 

I am indebted to the " Critical In trod action to the Old Testament" by W. M. 
L. De Wette, translated by Theodore Parker, for most of my information in 
regard to the authenticity of the books of the Old Testament, and to Heunell's 
"Onginof Christianity," for information as to the miracles recorded, and the 
prophecies referred to, by the Evangelists. Strauss' "Life of Jesus," and 
his "Chnstliche Glaubenslehre" have furnished me with many ideas which are 
scattered throughout this book. I am also indebted to "Hume's Essays on 
Miracles,"and " On a Providence and a Future State," two of the most deeply phi- 
losophical works in existence : to chapters XV and XVI of Gibbon's "Decline 
and Fail of the Roman Empire;" to Voltaire's works, and to the " Vestiges of 
Creation." Paine's " Age of Reason" has had a great influence in breaking the 
bonds of superstition, but this influence has been owing not to any deep philo- 
sophy or extensive information contained in the book, but to its 'forcible style 
and the contagious boldness of the author's thoughts. He who wishes to read 
what may be said in defense of the Bible, will find Paley's ** Evidences of [for] 
Christianity", "Butler's Analogy of Religion," Palfrey's "Evidences of 
Christianity," and Morell's "Philosophy of Religion" to be excellent works. 



Typographical Errors. 



Page. 


Line from top. 


Is. 


Should be. 


103 


last, 


Note 7, 


Note 8. 


108 


last, 


Note 8, 


Note 9. 


109 


fourth, 


above, 


to. 


111 


last, 


Note 9, 


Note 11. 


129 


twenty-eighth, 


natural, 


national. 


136 


twenty-third, 


rewarded. 


reward. 



There are a great many other minor errors, but they do not violate the meaning of 
the sentences. 

The author erred in stating, on page 153, that the Church had admitted that the 
mind was only a function of the brain, and that all men were not descended from one 
pair of ancestors. 



• ■» • 



THE END. 



M &9 4 





\°°* 






"oO^ 



> 



«5e c^ 






& 



4 1 






r oo^ 









> 




^^wte^ ' 






*v 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 





013 805 520 6 



XOwPhHk 

HgAmflnj 

SSSsSSo 



» t i .. ■ » 



HWaS 



9HK9 



I ^1 






bbss 






88 

■ I ■ ■ 



